' Epochs of Modern History 

EDITED BY 
DWARD E. MORRIS, M.A., J. SURTEES PHILLPOTTS, B.C.L. 

AND 

C. COLBECK, M.A. 



THE NORMANS IN EUROPE 



REV. A. H. JOHNSON 



Epochs of Modern History 



THE 



NORMANS IN EUROPE 



EY THE 



REV.. M III JOHNSON, M.A. 
ti 

LATE FELLOW OF ALL SOULS COLLEGE, OXFORD 

.HISTORICAL LECTURER TO TRINITY, ST. JOHN's, PEMBROKE, AND 

WADHAM COLLEGES 



WITH MAPS 




BOSTON 
ESTES AND LAURIAT 

CHICAGO 

JANSEN, McCLURG, & CO. 

SAN FRANCISCO 

PAYOT, UPHAM, & CO. 

1877 



«6 



PREFACE. 



The history of the Scandinavian Exodus which began 
in the ninth century falls conveniently into two periods. 

During the first, (800 circ. — 912) the people of 
Denmark, Sweden, and Norway harassed Europe with 
their inroads, and formed definite settlements in the 
British Isles, Russia, and France. 

During the second, (1029-1066) France itself 
became the starting-place for a new series of incur- 
sions, led by men of Scandinavian descent, who had 
by that time adopted French customs and language. 
To this period belong the settlements in Spain and 
Italy, and the Norman conquest of England. 

The aim of this book is to present a connected 
view of these incursions, and to bring clearly before 
the reader the important fact, that the Norman Con- 
quest was only the last of this long series of settle- 
ments and conquests. 

The narrow limits required by the character of the 
series have necessitated much compression. 

Taking, therefore, the Norman Conquest as the 
centre of the book, I have contented myself with the 
briefest sketch of those settlements which do not inti- 
mately affect that event ; and concentrating attention 
on that of the Seine, have sketched its fortunes in 
some detail, and traced the growing connection be- 



vi Preface. 

tween Normandy<and England which resulted in the 
conquest of the latter country. 

Finally, following the Normans to England, I have 
dwelt especially on their influence on our country and 
the principles of our government, and drawn out the 
relations of Norman England with France and Sicily. 

Want of space alone has prevented me from deal- 
ing more particularly with the Norman settlement in 
Italy, one of the most interesting of all, and one which 
requires the more attention, because it has not been 
adequately treated of by any EngHsh writer. But the 
history of that island belongs to Italian and Eastern 
rather than to English history, and it is one important 
period of English history which I have attempted to 
illustrate. 

In one respect I feel conscious of having departed 
somewhat from the rule of the series. There are more 
names than I could have wished. This I have found 
unavoidable : but to obviate as far as possible the dif- 
ficulty which may thereby be caused to the young 
reader, I have added a few genealogies of the most 
important families. 

I have also given a short list of the authorities 
which may be useful t© those who would extend their 
studies. 

In conclusion, I would offer my best thanks to 
Professor Stubbs for much kind advice and invaluable 
criticism. 

Oxford : March, 1877. 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER I. 

THE NORTHMEN IN THEIR HOME, A. D. 700-855. 

Social and political condition of Denmark, Norway, 

and Sweden in the eighth century 
Their mythology . . . • 

Change in the life of the people. Disturbances at 

home, end of eighth century 
The Vikings begin to trouble Europe . 
Reigns of Harald Harfagr of Norway 
850 (circ.) Gorm the Old of Denmark . 

Eric of Sweden 
They subdue the petty chieftains 



3-7 
7-10 

10 
II 

12 

ib. 
ib. 
lb. 
The exodus of the Northmen definitely commences 13 

CHAPTER II. 

THE INVASIONS OF THE NORTHMEN. 

Two periods of invasion : {a) 787-855— Plundering 

raids, with no permanent results . . 15 

{h) 855-912 — ^A period of conquest and settlement 16 

Character, dress, arms, and ships of the Northmen . 16-19 

I. The Danish Conquest of England, 855-878. 

878. Peace of Wedmore . . . . 19-21 

Its effects upon England. . . .20 

958. Edgar the Peaceful king of all England . . ' 21 



viii Contents. 



787. II. The Norwegian invasions of Scotland, the 

Orkneys, and Shetland . . . .21 

875. The Jarls of Orkney . . . . 22 

1469. Union of Orkneys and Shetlands with Scotland 23 

III. Norwegian invasions of the Western Isles . ib. 
787-906. Naval empire founded under the Hy-Ivar, end 

of ninth century . . . . ib. 

980. Battle of Tara . . . . , 24 

1014. Battle of Clontarf .... ib. 

1098. Attempts of Magnus of Norway to re-establish 

his authority , . . . . ib. 

ii9o(circ.) Somarled . . . , . ib. 

1266. The Isles ceded to Scotland . . . ' ib. 

IV. Norwegian Settlements in Iceland, Faroe, and 
874-981. Greenland . . . . ,25 

930. The Republic of Iceland . . . . 26 

1 150. Fall of the Republic . . . .27 

1250. Iceland occupied by Kings of Norway . . ib. 

862-879. V. Ruric the Swede invades Russia and settles at 

Kiev ...... ib. 

865-1043. Commercial relations with, and attacks on, 

Constantinople . . . . . 28 

988. Vladimir accepts Christianity . . . ib. 

1030-6. Connexion between Russia and the West . . ib. 

The Varangian Guard . . . .29 

1032-1066 Harald Hardrada . . . . . 29-30 



CHAPTER HI. 

THE SETTLEMENTS IN GAUL. 799-912. 

Invasions of Europe by Hungarians, Saracens, and 

Northmen ..... 30-31 

Geographical divisions of the incursions of the 

Northmen ..... 
The Seine Settlements . 

888. RoUo lays siege to Paris 

912. Gains Normandy at the Treaty of Clair on Epte 
Condition of Europe in 912. 



32 
33 
34 
35 
q6 



Contents. 



IX 



888. Dismemberment of empire of the Karolings on 
death of Charles III. . . , . 

Rise of four kingdoms : — 
912-936. (i) Germany, under Conrad of Franconia and 

Henry of Saxony .... 
962. (2) Italy and Empire under Otho . 

881-912. (3) Burgundy (a) Transjurane under Rudolf . 

879-928. (jS) Cisjurane under Boso and Louis of Provence 

899-929. (4) Kingdom of West Franks under Charles the 

Simple ..... 
Later Years of Duke Rollo : — 

922. Rollo supports Charles the Simple against Robert 

of Paris and Herbert of Vermandois 

923. Charles the Simple taken prisoner and Rudolf of 

Burgundy made King of West Franks . . ib. 

923-932. Rollo gains the Bessin, abdicates, and dies . . 40-41 



36 



ih. 
ib. 

37 
ib. 

38-39 



40 



CHAPTER IV. 

WILLIAM LONGSWORD. 927-943. 

Competition for the See of Rheims 

936. Death of Rudolf of Burgundy. Lewis IV. King 

of West Franks . . . . . 

930-932. Revolt of Brittany. Normandy gains the Cotentin 

and Channel Islands .... 

932-933. Revolt of Danish party against William Longsword. 

Its effects on his policy . . . . 



43 
43 

44 

45 
942. Murder of William Longsword by Arnulf of Flanders 48-49 

CHAPTER V. 

THE CAPETIAN REVOLUTION. 



942-996. Duke Richard the Fearless 

942. Renewed Danish revolt . . . . 

Lewis IV. and Hugh of Paris invade Normandy 

and seize Richard .... 



49-67 
51 

52 



X Contents. 



945. Richard escapes from Laon and defeats Lewis at 

the battle of the Dives . . • • 53 

Richard marries the daughter of Hugh of Paris and 

becomes his vassal . . . .54 

946-953. War of two kings against the two dukes . . 55 

954. Death of Lewis IV. Lothaire chosen king . 57-58 

956. Hugh the Great succeeded by Hugh Capet, under 

the guardianship of Richard the Fearless . . ib. 

986. Lothaire succeeded by Lewis V. . . -59 

987. Death of Lewis V. Hugh Capet elected King of 

France . . . . . . 60 

Importance of the Capetian revolution . . 61-65 

991. Richard's war with England . . . . 66 

His death ...... 66 



CHAPTER VI. 

RICHARD THE GOOD AND THE NORMAN SETTLEMENT 
IN ITALY. 996-1026. 

996, Accession of Richard the Good . . .68 

997. The revolt of the peasants . . . . 68 
Relations with Paris, Burgundy, Blois, Brittany, 

and England ..... 72-75 
Normandy the centre of renewed spirit of enter- 
prise. Roger de Toesny in Spain . . . 76 
1029. Settlement at Aversa .... ib. 
Condition of South of Italy . . ' • 77 
The Conquest of Apulia . . . . ' ib. 
Robert Guiscard, Duke of Apulia . . . 78-80 
1060-1090 Conquest of Sicily by Roger I. . . .80 
1130. Roger II. King of Apulia and Sicily . , . 81 
1 1 94-1 195 Conquest of Sicily by Henry V. , . , ib. 



Contents. 



XI 



CHAPTER VII. 

RICHARD III. AND ROBERT THE MAGNIFICENT. 
IO26-I035. 



1026-1028 Richard III. 

1028. Robert the Magnificent 
1028-1035 Relations with Brittany, 
England . 
Acquisition of the Vexin 
T035. His pilgrimage and death 



Flanders, France, and 



PAGE 

82 



83 
84 
85 



CHAPTER VIII. 

EARLIER YEARS OF WILLIAM IN NORMANDY. I035-IO49. 

1035. William the Bastard .... 

Rebellions against the young duke 
1047, Organised conspiracy against William. Guy of 
Burgundy claims the dukedom 

Henry I. supports William for the last time 

Character of the struggle . • . 

Victory of Val-es-Dunes , . . . 

1049. William's treatment of Alencon 



86 
87 



ib. 
90 
ib. 



CHAPTER IX. 
FEUDAL SYSTEM AND MONASTICISM. 800-I050. 

Origin of feudalism as a system of land tenure 
and a system of government 

Feudal courts — incidents and aids 

Chivalry ..... 

Influence of feudalism on society and on the in 
dividual ..... 

Feudalism in Normandy 
940-1034. Monasticism in Normandy 
io34-io42Bec . . . . . 

Lanfranc at Bee . . , ; 

Influence of monasteries 



91-95 

95-97 

93 

98-107 
103 

IDS 
ib. 
107 
108 



xii Contents. 

CHAPTER X. 

REVIEW OF ENGLISH HISTORY. IOI7-IO53. 

PAGE 

1017-1035 The empire of Canute .... 109-iio 

1035-1042 Reigns of Harold and Harthacnut . . , no 

1042. Edward the Confessor. The four earldoms . 110-112 
1042-105 1 Ascendency of Godwine .... 113 

1051-1052 Exile of Godwine . . . . . 114 

Duke William visits England . . . ib. 

1052-1053 Return and death of Godwine . . . 115-116 

CHAPTER XI. 

LATER YEARS OF WILLIAM IN NORMANDY. I053-I063. 

1053. William marries Matilda of Flanders. Opposition 

and reconciliation of Lanfranc . . 116-117 

Changed relations between France and Normandy u8 

1054. RebeUion against William aided by Henry I. Vic- 

tory of Mortemer . . . ... 120 

900-1040. Retrospect of Angevin history . . . 121 
1058. Coalition of Henry I. and Geoffrey of Anjou 
against William. Normandy invaded. Victory 

of Varaville . . . . . . 123 

1060. Death of Henry I. and Geoffrey of Anjou . . ib. 

1063. William claims and conquers Maine . . 124-125 

CHAPTER XH. 

THE CONQUEST OF ENGLAND. IO52-I066. 

1052. Supremacy of Harold and his family - 125-126 

1062. His Welsh war , . . . . 126 

1064. His oath to WiUiam . . . .127 
1066. Death of Edward the Confessor. Harold elected 

King of England .... 127-128 
Invasion of Tostig and Harald Hardrada. Victory 

of Stamford Bridge . . . . ib, 

William prepares for invasion of England . . 130 
Sept. Lands at Pevensey. The battle of Hastings 131-134 

WiUiam marches on London and is elected king by 

the Witan . . . • -.135 



Contents. 



Xlll 



PAGE 
136 

138 



1067. Leaves for Normandy . . 

English revolts . . . . 

1071. Final conquest of England . 

CHAPTER XIII. 

WILLIAM'S ENGLISH POLICY. IO70-I087. 



I. William and the English. 
450-1O66. Sketch of Anglo-Saxon institutions 

Social and ofificial ranks . 

Tenure of land 

Local and ecclesiastical organization 

Judicial system 

Police .... 

Growth of thaneship 

Rise of territorial jurisdictions . 

Growth of burghs 

The Witenagemot 

The king 

Distinction between Anglo-Saxon and Continen- 
tal feudalism ..... 
1070-1087 William's policy that of adaptation . 151-154 

Effect of Norman Conquest on the lower and 

higher classes . . . i54-i55 

Beneficial results of Norman conquest , . 156 

II. William and the Norman barons 
Introduces feudal system of land tenure gra- 
dually, but checks the feudal independence 
of his barons .... 

The Palatine earldoms . . . . 

The difference between English and French 

feudalism, the result of his policy . 161-165 

III. William and the Church. 

Importance of ecclesiastical history in early times 165 
Degraded condition of Anglo-Saxon Church . 166 
Scheme of Gregory VII, . . 167-169 

William's ecclesiastical policy. He reforms the 
Church, increases its power, and makes it a 
balance to the barons . , , . 170 



140 
140-151 
140 
140 
140-142 

143 
144 

145 
146 

147 
148 
149 

150 



158 



159 
159 



XIV 



Contents, 



But refuses homage to the Pope, and claims to rule 

the national Church . . . . 171 

Results of his policy . . . . 172 



CHAPTER XIV. 

END OF REIGN OF WILLIAM I. IO73-I087. 

1073. Maine revolts and appeals to Fulk ofAnjou. In 
vasion of Maine and treaty of Blanchelande 
Robert, Count of Maine 
1075-1076 Revolt of Ralph Guader and Roger de Breteuil 
Fate of Waltheof .... 

1077-1080 Rebellion of Robert 
1082. Odo of Bayeux arrested 

1085. Threatened invasion from Norway and Denmark 

1086. The oath at Sarum 
The Domesday Survey 

1087. Quarrel with Philip of France about the Vexin 
Death of William .... 



174 

176 
ib. 
177 
ib. 
ib. 
178 
179 
180 



CHAPTER XV. 

WILLIAM RUFUS. I087-IIOO. 

1087. Accession of William Rufus 

Norman nobles support claim of Robert, William 
appeals to the English and defeats the rebels 

Invasion of Normandy and treaty with Robert 
1089. Death of Lanfranc. Rise of Ranulf Flambard 

Ecclesiastical policy .... 
1093. Anselm made archbishop. His character . 

Quarrel between Anselm and William 
1097. Anselm appeals to Rome and leaves England 
1091-1093 Scotch war. Condition of Scotland 

1093. Malcolm invades England and is slain at Alnwick 
1093-1097 Civil war in Scotland. Edgar, aided by William 

wins the crown .... 

1094. Revolts of Norman barons . , 



182 

ib. 
183 

ib. 
184 
185 
187 
189 
190 
191 

ib. 
ib. 



Contents. 



XV 



War with Robert. Robert pledges Normandy to 

William and goes on the First Crusade 
1095-1099 The First Crusade. 

Causes of the Crusades .... 
Influence of Normans on First Crusade : 

(a) The Lorraine party 

(jS^ The Vermandois party 

(y) The Norman party 
Family alliances of the Normans 
Types of the Crusaders .... 

1099. Foundation of Frankish kingdom of Jerusalem 
Prosperity and wickedness of William Rufus 
Normandy pacified. Wars against Philip I. of 

France ..... 

1096-1099 Revolt of Maine .... 

1 100. WiUiam II. killed in New Forest 



192 

193 

194 
ib. 

ib. 

^95 
196 
197 

ib. 

198 
199 
200 



CHAPTER XVI. 

HENRY I. IIOO-II35. 

Early hfe of Henry I. . . . . 200 

1 100. His election and charter . . . 201, 202 

Political importance of elective principle . . 203 

HOI. Robert claims the crown and invades England . ib. 

Resigns the crown. .... 204 

Henry attacks his partisans . . . . ib. 

Anarchy in Normandy .... 205 

1 104. Henry invades Normandy . = . . ib. 

1106. Robert taken prisoner at Tinchebrai . . ib. 

1 106. Normandy and England united . . . ib: 

Henry's policy towards Wales . . . 206 

I III. Flemish colony in Pembrokeshire . . . ib. 

iioo. Quarrel with Anselm on question of investitures . ib. 

1 106. Question compromised .... 207 

His general ecclesiastical policy . . . 208 

1111-1113 Wars with France and William CHto . . 210 

1113. Treaty of Gisors . . . . . 211 

His alliances . . . . . ib. 

1115-1119 Renewed war in France , . . , ib. 
M.li. a 



xvi Contents. 

PAGE 

1 1 19. Victory of Brenneville . . . .211 

Death of Prince William . . . . ib. 

1124-1128 Renewed war in Normandy , . . 212 
1 128. Death of William Clito. Normandy, Maine, and 

Brittany finally secured . . . . ib. 

Extent of Henry's dominions . . . ib. 
Marries Matilda to Geoffrey of Anjou and tries to 

secure h»r succession . . . . 213 
1 135. His death in Normandy. Review of his policy 213-216 

His character . . , . . . 216 

1135-1154 Anarchy of Stephen's reign . . . . 218 

Beneficial results of the civil war . . . ib. 

Review of the period ■ . . . 219 

Condition of Norman and Scandinavian kingdoms 220 

Close of the Norman period . . . . 221 



CHAPTER XVH. 

NORMAN ADMINISTRATION. 



The king 

The Officers of the Household 

High Steward 

Chamberlain 

Constable 
The Ministei'ial Officers : 

The Justiciary 

The Treasurer 

The Chancellor 
The Curia Regis 



222 

222, 223 
ib. 
ib. 

■ 223 

224 

225 

ib. 

226 



The Exchequer 

Local Courts of Shire, Hundred, and Manor. 

Township and Forest Courts . . 227-232 

The Manor . . , . . . 228 

Guilds — Frith, Merchant and Craft . 231-233 

Military System : . . • . . 

The Militia . .... 234 

The Feudal levy . . . . ib. 

The Mercenaries . . . . 235 



Contents. xvii 

PAGE 

1135-1154 The Commune Concilium .... 235 

Ecclesiastics, Earls, Barons, Knights . 235-236 

Administration of Normandy . . . 237 

GENEALOGICAL TABLES 239 

INDEX 247 



MAPS. 

Europe (912) . . . . . to face 38 '"'' 

England and Normandy under Henry I ,, 206 ' 

Europe (1135) . . . . . ,, 220 '■' 



LIST OF AUTHORITIES. 

The standard English authorities for the period are : — ■ 

Freeman, 'The Norman Conquest of England.' 

Gibbon, ' Decline and Fall.' 

Lappenberg, 'Anglo-Saxon and Norman Kings.' 

Milman, 'Latin Christianity.' 

Stubbs, ' Constitutional History and Documents Illustrative of 
English History.' 

Palgrave Sir Francis, (i) 'England and Normandy' ; (2) ' Eng- 
lish Commonwealth.' 

The following will also be found useful: — 
For Chapter I, 
Dasent, 'Norsemen in Iceland,' Oxford Essays, 1858. 
Keyser, ' Private Life of Northmen ' ; ' Religion of Northmen. ' 
Laing, ' Sea Kings of Norway.' 
Maurer, Konrad, (i) ' Beitrage zur Rechtsgeschichte des Ger- 

manischen Nordens.' 
Maurer, G. L. ' Einleitung, Markenverfassung, Dorfverfassung.' 

Chapter II. 
Burton, ' History of Scotland.' 

Dasent, 'Jest and Earnest' ; 'The Vikings of the Baltic' 
Maurer, Konrad, 'Island.' 
Leveque, ' Histoire de Russie.' 
Ralston, ' Lectures on Early History of Russia.' 
Robertson, ' Scotland under her Early Kings.' 
Skene, ' Highlands of Scotland. ' 

Chapter VL 
Amari, ' Storia dei Mussulmani di Sicilia' (Florence). 
Gianone, ' History of the Kingdom of Naples ' (translated). 
Lalumia, ' Storia di Sicilia sotto Gulielmo il Buono ' (Florence). 
Gregorio Rosario, ' Considerazione suUa Storia di Sicilia' 

(Palermo). 

Chapter IX. 
Brunner, ' Entstehung der Schwurgerichte.' 
Coulanges, Fustelde, 'La Feudahte.' 
' Gottinsche Gelehrte Anzeigen : Nachrichten. ' 
Roth, (i) ' Geschichte des Beneficial Wesens ' ; (2) ' Feudalitat 

und Unterthanverband.' 
Sohm, ' Alt-deutsche Reichsund Gerichtsverfassung. ' 
Stapleton, ' Introduction to Rotuli Curiae Normanniae. ' 
Waitz, 'Deutsche Verfassung Geschichte.' 



THE 

NORMANS IN EUROPE. 



CHAPTER I. 

THE NORTHMEN IN THEIR HOME. 

If we would thoroughly appreciate the importance of the 
Northmen and their influence on Europe, we must realise 
the wide extent of their conquests and settle- wide extent 
ments. To treat of the conquest of Eno;land ofthesettie- 

'^ ^ ments of the 

by the Normans as an isolated event would be Northmen, 
entirely to obscure its real meaning and effect ; and this 
is equally true of the other settlements of the Northmen. 
Leaving their Northern homes in the ninth century, 
they had by the end of the twelfth penetrated into nearly 
every country of Europe. So close were their political 
and family relations with all the countries of the West, 
from Iceland to Constantinople, from Russia to Spain, 
during the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries, that a 
history of the Northmen is little short of a history of 
Europe during those ages. The great Exodus of the 
Scandinavian peoples which began in the ninth century, 
must accordingly be treated as a whole — and such will be 
the object of this book. 

Again, it must be remembered that the three Northern 
countries of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden all shared in 
£iriM. H. B 



2 The Normans in Europe. ' a.d. 

the general movement, and that the expeditions were 
often joined indiscriminately by Dane and Swede and 
Norseman. 

It will be well, therefore, to direct our attention in the 
^, ^^ , first instance to these three countries, and 

The North- . , . , 

men in obtam as accuratc a knowledge of the condi- 

their home. ^-^^^ ^^ ^l^^ Northmen in their home as is pos- 
sible from the scanty evidence which exists. 

Denmark, Sweden, and Norway were, in the eighth 
century, inhabited by a people called the ' Northmen,' a 
name universally used to describe the inhabitants of the 
Scandinavian continents. 

These Northmen were, there is little doubt, closely 
akin to the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons, who had left their 
homes on the shores of the German Ocean some five 
centuries before for England, — branches therefore of the 
great Teutonic family of the Indo-European or Aryan 
race, which, coming originally from the East, broke in 
upon the Roman Empire, and overwhelmed the earlier 
Keltic or Finnish tribes who preceded them. 

That this people should have turned north rather 
than south, that they should have occupied the in- 
hospitable regions of the Scandinavian conti- 

Reason for , . ^ , , i mi 

their settle- nents m preference to the more accessible 
Denmark l^^^i'^s to the south of them, may, at first, 
Norway, appear extraordinary. But, apart from the 
probability that they were forced northwards 
by the pressure ensuing on the general migration of the 
Gothic races and their conflict with the Roman Empire, 
the fact is not hard to explain on other grounds. These 
continents, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, with all their 
apparent savageness, offered to a people of hunters 
better opportunities for supporting life, than the trackless 
forests of Germany. The land abounded in animals 
which could be more easily captured in the broken coun- 



yoo-Soo. The Northmen in their Home. 3 

try of the North than in the dense forests and wide 
plains of Germany. The rivers and fiords teemed with fish 
and wild-fowl ; fossil belemnite and other stones used for 
weapons in an early state of society, are said to abound 
on the Norwegian coast ; and Sweden was singularly 
rich in iron and copper ore, which lay very near the sur- 
face. Everything, in fact, required by people in an early 
state of civilisation was to be found there. 

Of the condition of the Northmen at the time of their 
first settlement we can assert nothing. We do not know 
whether they had already passed out of the ^ . , 

•^ ■' ^ social and 

hunting stage and become a pastoral people, political 
nor can we mark the date at which this con- ^°" "^°"' 
dition was abandoned for the more fixed one which marks 
the rise of the agricultural system. The analogy of all 
other tribes of which we have any historical evidence 
would lead us to suppose that they had, at some time, 
passed through these stages. But, when we first meet with 
them, they had certainly become an agricultural people, 
and dwelt in settled homes. 

The origin of society amongst the Northmen, in com- 
mon with the rest of the Germanic peoples, is probably 
to be sought in the ' village community,' an ^j^^ ^^^^^ 
association founded en the real or fictitious tie System. 
of the family. According to this system, the district 
occupied by each community was the cr mmon possession 
of the family or tribe, in whom the absolute ownership 
resided, and was divided into three parts : the village, 
the arable 'land,' and the common pasture. In the 
village, each of the tribal members had his homestead. 
Of the arable lands he had a right to a share, but he had 
to follow the prescribed rotation in his crops, and, when 
it was to lie fallow, changed his plot for another. On the 
pasture lands he might turn out his cattle, and cut his fire- 
wood, and when they were taken up for hay, each marks- 



TJie Normans in Europe. 



A.D. 



man would have his hay-field. Thus the tribes-man was 
the tenant rather than the owner, and individual pro- 
prietorship, as we have it, was unknown. Each village 
community would have its assembly, in which every free 
mark-man enjoyed a right to sit, and here the petty laws 
which regulated the self-governing body would be passed. 
This state of things, however, soon passed away. 
The improvement of agriculture led to the desire of a 
more permanent system of allotment, and 

Rise of . , , . ^ ■' 1 • . 

personal With the risc of separate ownership, ine- 

owners ip. quality of estate grew up. Thus, by the eighth 
century, the mark system had, partially, at least, dis- 
appeared. 

Here, again, we are surrounded with difficulties 
arising from want of evidence. The Sagas are our 
T., c only authority. Of these there exist two 

our only compilations, both of comparatively late date. 

ority. ^ 'Y\i^ elder Edda, a collection of the Sagas 
(lays), handed down from heathen times, and compiled 
about 1090 by a Christian priest of Iceland, Saemund 
Sigfusson by name. 2. The younger Edda, a prose 
mythology, written in the thirteenth century by, or 
under the direction of, Snorro Sturleson, another Ice- 
lander of noble family. In this, the old traditions 
gathered from the elder Edda and other Sagas, now lost, 
are strung together and given with matchless simplicity 
and pathos. 

Though, then, we cannot be sure as to the exact date 
of the Sagas themselves, they most probably belong to 
the period anterior to the movement of the Scandinavian 
people, and contain the traditions of the earher condition 
of their ancestors. The following description of Scan- 
Social dinavian society is that which has impressed 
classes. itself upon the scalds or rhymers. They speak 
of society as divided into two classes, i. The unfree — 



700-800. The Northmeii in their Home. 5 

This class, arising after the mark system had died out 
and the land had been to some extent divided, enjoyed 
personal freedom, but no civil rights. They did not hold 
land, nor were they entitled to sit in the local assemblies. 
They formed a body of labourers, and were in many 
cases the personal followers of those above them. 2. The 
odal proprietors, or yeomen, formed a numerous body of 
small landowners, and were the only aristocracy. These 
Avere the original members of the old village community, 
who had established their right of individual ownership. 
They held their land in absolute proprietorship, and 
owed no taxes or dues to the Government beyond the 
bare necessity of contributing to the defence of their 
country. Any land yet undivided remained the common 
property of the tribe, and was ' leased ' out to these odal 
proprietors on varying terms of tenure. 

The political organization was based upon the mark 
system, which here left more enduring traces. Each 
village formed a separate community with its PoHtical or- 
village assembly, in which the odal proprietor, gamzation. 
or yeoman, enjoyed an inalienable right of sitting. Sum- 
moned to these ' Things,' as they were called, village com- 
by a ' Bod,' or stick, which was passed from mumties. 
house to house, they there in concert managed the affairs 
of the district. 

Each village had its village thing, and head-man, and 
enjoyed considerable independence. A number of village 
communities formed a small tribal State, with villages and 
its own petty king and assembly, larger than States. 
the village ' thing.' 

The assemblies of the states and villages enjoyed 
together a supreme legislative, judicial, and administra- 
tive authority, the greater '■ things ' assuming the legis- 
lative and judicial, the lesser, the administrative functions 
within their respective spheres. So that the village 



6 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

'■ thing ' would be bound to carry Out the laws made, or 
the sentences passed, by the assembly, or ' thing/ of the 
state, just as an English Town Council is bound to carry 
out the provisions of an Act of Parliament at the present 
day, while the village ' thing ' would have smaller matters 
i under its own control just as the Town Council has. 
Lastly, these states were sometimes, though not neces- 
, sarily, loosely united in a semi-federal union. 

The kings of the tribal states were generally taken 
from a noble family, sometimes representing the 
kingly line in virtue of a supposed descent from Odin. 
Their office was in many cases partly hereditary, 
though probably, as with the Anglo-Saxons, elective 
within the limits of the privileged family. Their power 
was balanced by the assemblies of the state and 
village, without the concurrence of which they could 
perform no important act. Still, the king was not a 
imere nonentity. He presided in the assemblies and 
over the administration of justice ; he officiated in the 
sacrificial feasts, led the host to war, and, as in all early 
societies, the personal influence of a powerful king would 
extend his authority far beyond its theoretical limits. 

Feudal aristocracy there was none. The proud 
Northern yeoman would brook no superior, and the 
Ab n e of physical and historical circumstances of their 
feudal aris- country prevented the growth of any such 
tocracy. caste. The comparative barrenness of the 

soil — small pasture lands cooped in on all sides by rugged 
rocks, and separated by deep fiords — could not afford 
sufficient produce to furnish a rent to a great lord over 
and above the sustenance required by the occupier of the 
soil, while the isolation of these fertile spots fostered 
the independence of each family. The hard primary 
rocks of the Scandinavian continents were unfit for build- 



700-800. The Northmeii in their Home. y 

ing purposes, and no baron's castle rose to overawe the 
neighbourhood. Kings and people alike dwelt in wooden 
houses, which could easily be stormed and burnt. 

The physical peculiarities of the country were aided 
by other circumstances. The absence of the law of pri- 
mogeniture hindered the accumulation of large properties 
in one hand. At a later date the surplus population was 
drawn off by successive colonisations, while the levelling 
influence of war was not wanting to call forth individual 
merit, and to beat down the exclusive privileges of 
any one class. In the absence of writing, no learned 
class monopolised the management of state and village 
affairs, or pursued their studies in a literary language 
unknown to the lower classes, as was the case among 
the Anglo-Saxons in England, where the churchmen often 
wrote in Latin. 

As in all early societies, the prosecution of offenders 
was left to the individual or to his kith and kin. Pecu- 
niary compensations were resorted to in all Criminal 
cases, the state merely assessing the sum; ^^'^• 
but in the case of greater offences, the blood-fine might 
be refused when it was deemed dishonourable to the kith 
of the injured man if his death or wrong were not re- 
venged. This rough and ready system of justice explains 
many of the bloody struggles of those times. 

For the mythology of the Scandinavians, we must 
again turn to the elder and the younger Eddas. And 
this is what we there learn. In the beginning 
of time, when yet there was naught, two ^ oogy- 
regions lay on each side of chaos. To the north 
Niflheim, the abode of mist and snow and cloud and 
cold. To the south, Muspell, where it is so hot and 
bright that it burns, and none may tread save those 
who have an heritage there. The king of that land is 



8 The Noj'mans in Europe. a.d. 

Surtr, who guards the land with a flaming sword. When 
the hot blasts from Muspell met the cold rime and frost 
that came out of Niflheim, the frost melted by the might 
of Surtr, and became a great giant, Ymir, the sire of all 
the frost giants. But, besides the giant, the ice-drops as 
they melted formed a cow, on whose milk Ymir fed ; and 
as she licked the stones covered with rime, a man named 
Buri arose, v^ho was the father of Odin and his brethren. 
These are the ^sir, or good gods, and between these 
and tlie frost giants war arose, till at last Ymir was slain 
and all his race but one. From this one the later race 
of frost giants sprang. 

With the body of the giant Odin made the world. 
The sea and waters are his blood ; earth his flesh ; the 
rocks his bones ; pebbles his teeth and jaws. His skull 
was raised aloft and the heavens were made of it. The 
clouds are his brains. But the sun and moon and stars are 
fomied of the fires which came out of Muspell. These Odin 
fixed in the heavens, and ordered their goings. Odin, the 
father of all {Allfadir), next made man, and gave him^ a 
soul which shall never perish, though the body shall 
decay. 

Odin was the greatest of the gods. Next to him comes 
Frigga, his wife, who knows the fate of all men, though 
she never reveals it. Then Thor, his first-born son — the 
Thunderer, the chiefest of gods for strength, the sworn 
foe of the old frost giants, the tamer and queller of all 
unholy things. 

Next Baldr, of fairest face and hair, the mildest-spoken 
of the gods, the type of purity and innocence. 

These, with Freyr, who rules over rain and sunshine 
and the fruitfulness of the earth ; and Freyia, the goddess 
of love ; and many others, live in Midgard, the centre of 
the earth. Here they have built themselves a castle, 



8oo, The Northmen in their Home. 9 

Asgard, high above the earth ; whence they can see all 
that goes on among mortals. Here the good shall live 
with Odin after death— while the wicked shall go to Nifl- 
heim (hell), the place of darkness and of cold. 

But these simple myths were mingled with those of a 
more savage and sterner character, 

Odin is not The All-father alone, but the God of 
battle ( Valfadir) as well ; and as such is worshipped by 
bloody sacrifices. Instead of the peaceful after-life in Mid- 
gard, men look forward to Valhalla, where those who 
die in battle shall feast with Odin. There change In 
their pastime shall be to fight with each other "^^^ Religion 
from dawn till meal-time, when they ride back to Val- 
halla and sit down to drink. Those who die of sickness 
or old age shall go to hell ; the murderers, and those 
who forswear themselves, to Na — a region formed of 
adders' backs wattled together, whose heads spit venom 
and form streams in which these shall wade for ever. 

Meanwhile among the gods there is strife and woe. 
Of the children of the old frost giants, one Loki had 
been fostered by Odin, and brought up among his 
children, to their ruin. Fair of face is he, but a traitor, 
ill-tempered, deceitful, and of fickle mood. 

With the rise of the traitor the golden age of the 
^sir, or good gods, is at an end, and the old quarrels 
between them and the frost giants begin again. Yet so 
long as Baldr lived, sin and wickedness could not pre- 
vail on earth, nor could the ancient giant race triumph 
over the Msvc. To kill Baldr, therefore, was Loki's 
constant aim, and by treachery he succeeded. The gods, 
warned by the soothsayers that Baldr was doomed to die, 
made him free from death by sickness, or stones or trees, 
or beast or bird ; and, rejoicing in their triumph, found 
harmless pastime in shooting at Baldr and smiting him 



10 The Normans m Europe. a.d. 

with stones, while he remained unharmed. One tree, the 
mistletoe, they had not named, and Loki, making arrows 
of it, gave them into the hands of Hodr, the blind god. 
Armed with these weapons, he joined with his brethren in 
the sport, and shooting, slew fair Baldr, who went to hell. 
Loki, indeed, fell before the vengeance of Thor, but 
the doom of the gods was sealed ; and heralded by 
three winters with no summer in between, ' the twilight 
of the gods ' drew on. Then Surtr, the primeval god, 
should at last come forth, and hurling fire over the world, 
destroy the gods both good and bad. Then should arise 
another heaven, where the worthy dead should dwell with 
Surtr, and Baldr should thither return from hell. 

Priests there were none : the king of the tribe or 
village took their place, and on the great festivals of the 
year, led the assembled men of the district in their reli- 
gious ceremonies, and in the public business of the state 
with which the festal days were closed. 

Such, as far as we can judge from the scanty evidence 
that we have, was the condition of the Northmen in the 
eighth century. 

At the end of the eighth century, the homely, simple 
character of their life was disturbed. The Sagas clearly 
speak of a severe convulsion of society ; and though we 
Change in cannot trust thcse later authorities in their 
the life and details, they were probably correct as to facts. 
the people. The ill-defined relations of the several petty 
^^Y^^ states, to one another and to the village dis- 

century. tricts of which they were composed, prevented 
a stable system, and offered to ambitious chiefs tempting 
opportunities for aggression ; whilst the barrenness of 
the soil was unable to supply the growing wants of a 
rapidly increasing population. Hence the rise of petty 
struggles which rapidly became universal, and distracted 
the land with civil discord. The more fortunate chief- 



8oo. TTie Nor thine^i in their Home. ii 

tains established their authority ; the less fortunate, 
scorning to accept the position of dependents, took to the 
sea, their natural refuge, and, collecting the turbulent 
spirits round them, sought in a life of piracy the suste- 
nance denied them in their home. It was now that 
Europe first began to hear the name of the Yvc%t in- 
dread Vikings ( Vic, a bay or fiord), and to roads of the 
suffer from their piratical inroads. In Eng- 
land the Danes appear, and threaten her rising unity. 
Abroad, the Northmen hasten to avenge the conquests 
of the Saxons by the Emperor of the West, and Charles 
the Great wept to see the long boats of these the deadly 
foes of his empire and his race, as they swept the 
Mediterranean. 

Meanwhile at home the successful chieftains, relieved 
in part of their more independent adversaries, were en- 
abled, though by severe struggles, gradually to . 
consolidate their power. Many modifications changes 
were introduced into the social and political ^^ °"^^' 
condition of the people. Slavery increased, social 
equality was broken through, royalty throve at the ex- 
pense of individual liberty : piracy was now considered 
an honourable pursuit : the character of the people was 
affected. Surrounded by daily warfare, they caught the 
spirit of the times and became more warlike. 

These petty struggles, with their attendant results, 
occupy the history of the northern kingdoms until, 
towards the latter half of the ninth century, they are 
replaced by more systematic attempts at organisation. 

Within a few years of each other, three men arose 
in the several kingdoms of Denmark, Norway, and 
Sweden — Gorm the Old, Harald Harfagr, and Eric — 
who attempt to overthrow the independent chieftains, 
and to establish their own undisputed authority. Of 
these, the history of Harald Harfagr, of Norway, may 



1 2 The Nvrvians in Europe. a. d. 

be taken as a type. The son of a petty prince in the 
Reigns of south of Norway, he had sought a bride from 
Haraid the court of a neighbouring chieftain. The 

Harfagr, . , , , 

Gorm the maiden returned the contemptuous answer 
(mfddfe of ^^^^ ^^ would not throw herself away on a 
9th century), king who had but a few districts for a king- 
dom, and added the taunt that it was strange no prince 
in Norway could make the whole country subject to him 
as Gorm the Old had done in Denmark, and Eric at 
Upsal. Incited by this spirited reply, Haraid swore a 
solemn vow never to clip or comb his hair until he had 
subdued the whole of Norway, or to die in the attempt ; 
'■ and forthwith,' says the Saga, ^ he devoted his life to 
this great aim.' His object was not gained without a 
struggle. The petty chieftains, united by their common 
danger, fought desperately and long ; but Haraid, aided 
by his own personal ability, and fortunately served by 
some of the best swords of the day, defeated them in a 
succession of severe encounters, and thus fulfilling his 
vow, gained his kingdom and his bride. 

Of the petty chieftains, many had fallen in battle, 
scorning to live on in disgrace; a few became his de- 
pendents, and ruled their once independent possessions 
as his vice-regents. Most left their native shores, and 
sought in other lands the power they had lost at home. 
The movement thus begun was furthered by the means 
resorted to by Haraid in organising his newly-won do- 
Effect of in- iiiain. In the preceding times, the Vikings 
creased or- had not confined their piratical incursions to 
* ' foreign lands ; they had plundered their own 

country as well, and preyed on kith and kin. Now, 
Haraid adopted vigorous measures to put down this 
piracy ; the turbulent spirits, driven from their own 
shores, swelled the forces of the exiled chieftains. His 
measures affected also the peaceable proprietors who 



850-900. The Noi'thmen in their Home,. 13 

had hitherto stayed at home. The expenses of g-overn- 
ment necessarily increasing with its centrahsation, he 
was forced to raise money. This he did, not only by 
appropriating the common lands hitherto the undivided 
property of the collective tribe, and by transferring all 
taxes and fines paid into the common treasury of the 
tribe or to the chieftain, to the royal coffers, but also by 
imposing taxes on those who, till then, had held their 
land in full and free ownership. Irritated at this loss of 
their freedom, and in some cases perhaps unable to 
wring sufficient produce from the sterile soil, many of 
these, the backbone of the Northern people, joined the 
other discontented spirits, and furnished an element 
of stability and organisation hitherto unknown in the 
expeditions of the Vikings. 

Then a movement, as yet unheard of, began. Den- 
mark and Sweden, subjected under Gorm and Eric, 
probably experienced a similar convulsion. Renewed 
and a general exodus of the Northern people !^°1sr^ *th 
commenced. men. 

It is material to note the difference between this 
later movement and the earlier ones which had pre- 
ceded it. These were little more than maraud- its peculiar 
ing expeditions for the sake of plunder, features. 
The pirates sailed the seas, pounced down upon any 
defenceless point, harried, sacked, and burnt the place, 
and were off again before any resistance could be or- 
ganised. They had no idea of forming any definite 
settlement, and ravaged the territories of mend and foe 
alike. But now all this changes. The idea of definite 
settlement becomes apparent. The expeditions are 
joined, as we have seen, by a different class — proprietors 
robbed of their land and rights (as they, no doubt, 
deemed them), men to whom plunder for plundering's 
sake was distasteful, and who were anxious to find a 



14 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

peaceable home elsewhere — these are the class of men 
who now take the lead, and organise the hitherto 
aimless ravages of their countrymen. Hence it is that 
the invasions of the Northmen, always ushered in by' 
plundering incursions, about this time change their 
character, and take the form of permanent settlements. 
Thus in England, the Danish invasions, which had 
been going on since 787, assumed a new form in 855, 
and the country was finally divided between Alfred and 
the Danes in 878. In France the interest is seen to 
centre round fewer leaders, who are evidently aiming 
at settlement, and already the Seine has become the 
favourite scene of action ; while the Orkneys, Shet- 
lands, Faroe Islands, Iceland, Russia now probably 
receive their new colonists. 



CHAPTER II. 

THE INVASIONS OF THE NORTHMEN. 

We have now arrived at the point when we must leave 
the shores of the northern continent and follow the 
exiles in their several conquests and settlements. These 
naturally fall into two periods : — 

I. 787-S55. During which the invasions are little 
more than plundering raids. 

Two periods -' 8 5 5-9 1 2. A period of conquest and 

of invasion : definite Settlement. 

plundering On the earlier period we need not long 

g^'g^^ 2 dwell. The incursions were of necessity only 
settlement. temporary in their effects, and were chiefly 
confined to England, Germany, and France, though 
Spain and even Italy were by no means free from 
attack. 



787-912. The Invasions of the Northmen. 15 

Of these the Danish invasions of England, the best 
authenticated, scarcely come within the scope of our 
subject. Their attacks on Italy and Spain, ^ 

•' J >. J bcandina- 

though no doubt severe, led to no permanent vian inva- 
results till a much later date, while in Cer- En"k°ndi 
many and France their annals are rendered ]}^^y^ 
irremediably defective through the insuffi- Germanjr, 
ciency of contemporary authorities. From ^ance. 
the death of the chronicler Nithard, grandson of Charles 
the Great, a Count of Ponthieu, who fell fighting against 
the Northmen, and left a fragment abruptly ended by his 
death, the authorities are very scant and the information 
confused. The frequent repetition of particular names 
running over a period longer than that generally covered 
by the deeds of one man, renders it probable that the 
terror of a name lasted after the hero's death, and led 
the ecclesiastical chroniclers, never very well informed 
of events unconnected with their own district, to attribute 
to one the deeds of many. 

All that we can feel certain of, all at least which it is 
in any way important to remember, is the frequency and 
enormous area of the attacks, and this cannot 
be put in better words than those of Sir Francis quency of 
Palgrave : — ' Take,' he says, ' the map, and ^"^^^^ ''^^'^^• 
cover with vermilion the provinces, districts, and shores 
which the Northmen visited, as a record of each invasion, 
the colouring will have to be repeated more than ninety 
times successively before you arrive at the conclusion of 
the dynasty of Charles the Great. Furthermore, mark 
by the usual symbol of war, two crossed swords, the 
localities where battles were fought by the pirates, where 
they were defeated or triumphant, or where they pillaged, 
burned, or destroyed, and the valleys and the banks of 
the Elbe, Rhine and Moselle, Scheldt, Meuse, Somme 
and Seine, Loire, Garonne and Adour, and all the coasts 



1 6 TJie Nonnans in Europe. a.d. 

and coast-lands between\ estuary and estuary, all the 
countries between river and streams will appear bristling 
as with chevaux de frise.' This will give us some idea of 
the invasions as far as Gaul and Germany are concerned ; 
but it should be repeated for England, Scotland, and the 
islands which surround their coasts to give any adequate 
conception of the misery they caused. 

Confining, then, our attention more particularly to 
the second period, let us briefly consider the appearance 
and characteristic qualities of these Northmen. 

The outward look of the Norse, the Dane, the Norse- 
man was much the same. Broad-shouldered, deep- 
Outward chested, long-limbed, yet with slender waist 
^-^ii- and small hands and feet, their figures told of 

strength; and so necessary was strength considered that 
puny infants were exposed and left to die, the healthy 
children being alone preserved. Their complexion — their 
hair and eyes, were fair — and the fair alone could pass for 
beautiful or well-born. A dark complexion was considered 
the mark of an alien race, and dishonourable. Thus 
Baldr, the noblest of the gods, was fair, and the outward 
appearance of the slave was thus contrasted with that of 
the freeman. Black and ugly they are. Their forefather. 
Thrall, had a broad face, bent back, long heels, bhstered 
hands, stiff, slow joints, and clumsy figure. His wife. 
Thy, is bandy-legged, flat-nosed, and her arms are brown 
with toiling in the sun. Their children are like them. 

The ordinary dress of both sexes was nearly the same. 
A shirt, loose drawers, long hose, high shoes with thongs 
twisted up the ankle. A short kirtle girt at 
the waist served for coat or gown ; an armless 
cloak, with a low-crowned, broad brimmed hat, completed 
the dress of the man. The woman, instead of the hat, 
wore a wimple of linen, and over that a high twisted cap, 
sometimes bent at the top into the shape of a horn, but 



855912. 'The In vasions of the Northmen. 1 7 

otherwise dressed much as the men. The under-clothing 
of both sexes was of linen ; their outer of coarse, woollen 
homespun — of grey, or black, or blue, or red, the most 
prized of all. 

To this the chiefs added in the time of war a helm 
and shirt of mail, and all were armed with a long shield, 
protecting the whole body — white in time of 

1 . . r T • 1 Their arms. 

peace, red m time of war — covered with 
leather, with iron rim and boss ; spears of ashen shaft 
and iron point ; axes ; and, above all, the sword, the dar- 
ling of the Northmen. 

Their ships were long half-decked galleys, propelled 
by oars and sail. The waist, where the rowers sat, was 
low, that the oars might have free play. The 
bow and stern were high, and ended, the ^^^ ^ ^^^' 
former in a beak or jaw, the latter in the tail of some 
beast. Dragons were the most commonly represented, 
and thus the ship looked hke a huge monster on the sea, 
whose gaping jaws were held to bewitch the foe. The 
sails were gay with stripes of blue or green or red. 

In the prow stood the warriors, and the vessel was 
driven stem on against the enemy: in the stern the chief, 
and behind him the helmsman, his helm inscribed with 
magic runes to charm away all evil. In action the rowers 
were protected by planks set up along the bulwarks, and 
all round the vessel ran a gangway, from whence they 
boarded the enemy's ship. 

The character of these hardy Northmen was well 
suited to their future destiny. 

The daily struggle for existence in an inhospitable 
climate had taught them fearlessness and ready wit in 
danger. From the absence of all aristocracy 
or other privileged class they had acquired a of th?'^*^^ 
spirit of independence, a haughty and unbend- Northmen 
ing character which prepared them for their future con- 

M. H. C 



The Normans in Etn^ope. 



A.D. 



quests. Set face to face with the mysteries of nature and of 
their self-taught rehgion, they had gained an heroic fanciful- 
ness, a thoughtful sternness which lit up the darker tints. 
These features were the natural result of the free and 
independent life of their forefathers. To these we must 
add a cold-blooded ferocity, contracted in the long civil 
disturbances which had torn their country since the end 
of the eighth century. All these are the qualities common 
in early times to successful conquerors ; but, as we follow 
the history of their settlements, another more important 
feature appears, namely, their extraordinary 
assimUa° versatility and power of adapting themselves I 

tion. ^Q varied forms and states of society. The 

Northmen never seem to have been original, never to 
have invented anything ; rather they readily assumed the 
language, religion, ideas of their adopted country, and 
soon became absorbed in the society around them. This 
will be found to be invariably the case, except with regard 
to Iceland, where the previous occupation was too insig- 
nificant to affect the new settlers. In Russia, they became 
Russians ; in France, Frenchmen ; in Italy, Itahans ; in 
England twice over Englishmen, first in the case of the 
Danes, and secondly, in that of the later Normans. 
Everywhere they became fused in the surrounding 
nationality. /Their individuality is lost, and their presence 
is traced only in the nomenclature of the country, that 
fossil remnant of denationalised races, as it has been 
called. Not so their influence. They fell on stirring 
times, and in every case they took the lead, and deeply t 
affected the nations with which they came in contact. > 
Europe at that date was in a fluid state, and the North- 
men seem to have acted as a crystallising power ; to 
have formed a nucleus round which political society 
might grow. / In Iceland they formed a free republic, in 
Russia they first organised a kingdom ; in England they, 



855-912. The Invasions of the Northmen. 19 

by their pressure, first consolidated the kingdom of 
Wessex, then conquered it under Canute and William I. ; 
in the West-Frankish country they finally put an end to 
the long struggle for supremacy, sounded the death- knell 
of the Karolings of Laon, and aided to form modern 
France. Nor is this all ; they borrow everything and 
make it their own, and their presence is chiefly felt in 
increased activity and more rapid development of institu- 
tions, literature, and art. ^ Thus, while they invent no- 
thing, they perfect, they organise everything, and every- 
where appear the master-spirits of their age. 

We have hitherto treated the Norwegians, Swedes 
and Danes under the common appellation of Northmen ;• 
and this is in many ways the most convenient, for it is 
often impossible to decide the nationality of the indi- 
vidual settlement. Indeed, it would appear probable that 
the devastating bands were often composed indiscrimi- 
nately of the several nationalities. Still, in tracing the 
history of their conquests, we may lay it down as. a general 
rule that England was the exclusive prey of the Danes • 
that Scotland and the islands to the north as far as Ice- 
land, and to the south as far as Anglesea and Ireland 
fell to the Norwegians, and Russia to the Swedes ; while 
Gaul and Germany were equally the spoil of the Norwegians 
and the Danes. The last will claim our more careful atten- 
tion. At the former we can only cast a cursory glance. 

I. In England, the Danish inroads beginning about 
the year 787, had assumed their second phase o 

1 T o 11 becond 

about the year855, and destroyed the nascent period of 
unity of the kingdom then partially attained nWn' con- 
by Egbert, king of the West- Saxons. The T^^^' 
Danes had easily occupied the more northern Danish con- 
kingdoms of Northumbria, Mercia, and East England, 
Anglia ; peopled as they were by the Angles, ^ss-SyS. 
a race more nearly akin to their own than the Saxons 

c 2 



20 The Normans in Europe. a.d, 

and disorganised by the late struggles for supremacy. 
But as they drew near to the more thoroughly 
organised kingdom of Wessex, the opposition became 
more resolute, and the struggle more severe. Led by 
their great hero, Alfred, the Saxons maintained the 

struggle for seven years, until the peace of 
Wedmore, Wcdmore, 878, obtained for Wessex a respite 
^7^- from her harassing foe. By that peace Eng- 

land was divided into two nearly equal parts ; Alfred 
holding all south of the Thames, Lea, and Watling Street ; 
that is Kent, Sussex, Wessex, and part of Mercia ; while 
he ceded all north of this to the Danes, and Guthrum, 
their leader, acknowledging his over-lordship, embraced 
Christianity as a condition of the peace, 
^■■"^hus England was again divided, and her premature 
attempt at unity to all appearance indefinitely post- 
poned. 

Yet in trudi the loss was apparent rather than real. 
By this peace the limits between the two people were 

fixed, and the Danes no longer continued their 
Danish aggrcssious. Confined behind their self-con- 



invasions 



stituted boundary, they soon began to amalga- 
mate with the conquered people. Their leader having 
embraced Christianity, they gradually followed his ex 
ample, and the northern Church, overthrown in the earlier 
days of the Danish invasions, was speedily revived. 

Meanwhile, although temporarily a loss to England, 
the result of the Scandinavian invasions had been to 
consolidate Wessex. During the struggle she had been 
looked upon as the national leader of the EngHsh, and 
common perils and victories had fused the various Saxon 
tribes more completely than they had ever been before. 
The part of Mercia which remained to Wessex became 
completely incorporated with her, while the organisation 
of the country was systematised and perfected by the wise 



S78-958. T^h^ Invasions of the Northmen. 2 1 

measures of Alfred and his successors. When the re- 
action came, Wessex stepped boldly forth and encroached 
upon the Danish districts. During the reigns of Alfred's 
powerful sons and grandsons the advance was rapid. The 
Danes themselves crushed out the local independence, and 
the Saxons inherited the results of their labours. ^ ^ g 
When a hundred years are past, England, Edgar the 
under Edgar the Peaceful, came forth more king of all 
really united than ever before. The Danes England. 
had done their work, perhaps revived the institutions com- 
mon to the North German race, breathed new life into 
the social and political condition of the country, and then, 
assimilating themselves rapidly to the conquered people, 
dropped into the common mass of Englishmen. A 
few traces of their presence alone remained in the modifi- 
cation of some official titles, in a few privileges and laws, 
and other local peculiarities which lasted in Danelagu 
(the land of Dane law) till the Norman conquest, and in 
the nomenclature of certain localities and towns. ^ 

II. While England had been overcome by the Danes, 
the Norwegians had turned their attention Norwegian 
chiefly to the north of the British Isles and invasions of 
the islands of the West. Their settlements and the 
naturally fell into three divisions, which tally ^^^^^• 
with their geographical position, i. The Orkneys and 
Shetlands, lying to the N.E of Scotland. 2. The isles to 
the west as far south as Ireland. 3. Iceland and the 
Faroe Isles. 

The Orkneys and Shetlands. Here the Northmen first 
appear as early as the end of the eighth century, and a 
few peaceful settlements were made by those 

1 . , ... Orkneys 

who were anxious to escape from the noisy and 
scenes which distracted their northern country. Shetlands. 
In the reign of Harald Harfagr they assume new impor- 
tance, and their character is changed. Many of those 



22 The Normans in Europe^ a.d. 

driven out by Harald sought a Tefuge here, and betaking 
themselves to piracy periodically infested the Norwegian 
coast in revenge for th-eir defeat and expulsion. These 
ravages seriously disturbing the peace of his newly 
acquired kingdom, Harald fitted out an expedition and 
devoted a whole summer to conquering the Vikings and 
extirpating the brood of pirates. The country being gained, 
he offered it to his chief adviser, Rognwald, Jarl of Mori 
in Norway, father of Rollo of Normandy, who, though 
refusing to go himself, held it during his life as a family 
possession, and sent Sigurd, his brother, there, Sigurd, 
having organised his kingdom, crossed to the mainland 
,^and overran Caithness and Sutherland, .then, in com- 
mon with the Orkneys and the Shetlands, ia;ihabited by 
the North Picts, a tribe of Gaelic extraction. Sigurd's 
death was characteristic of his life. While carrying the 
head of a victim, Malbrede ' the bucktooth ' swung at 
his saddlebow, he was wounded in the leg by the pro- 
minent teeth of his lifeless foe, and died from the effects. 
Although his ally, Thorstein Olaveson, gained Caithness 
Establish- ^^^ Sutherland, on the direct failure of his 
ment of issue, authority was again in abeyance and the 

Orkney. Vikiugs again commenccd their ravages. Rogn- 

^75- wald next sent his son Einar, and from, his time 

we may date the final establishment of the Jarls of Orkney, 
who henceforth owe a nominal allegiance to the King of 
Norway. In the eleventh century the leading Jarl accepte^d 
Christianity at the peremptory demand of his 
brace Chris- Sovereign, and soon after they finally con- 
tianity. quered Caithness and Sutherland, and wrested 

a recognition of their claim from Malcolm 11. of Scotland. 
Their influence was continually felt in the dynastic and 
other quarrels of Scotland ; the defeat of Duncan, in 
1040, by the Jarl of Orkney, contributing not a little 
to Duncan's subsequent overthrow by Macbeth. They 



800-1469. The Invasions of the Northmen. 2^ 

Ssfostered the independence of the north of Scotland 
against the southern king, and held their kingdom until, 
in 1355, it passed by the female line to the house of 
Sinclair. The Sinclairs now transferred their 
allegiance to their natural master, the King Orkneys 
of Scotland ; and finally the kingdom of the farf^s^wkh 
Orkneys was handed over to James III. as Scotland, 
the dowry of his bride, Margaret of Norway. ^"^ ^' 

III. The close of the eighth century also saw the com- 
mencement of the' incursions of the Northmen in the west 
of Scotland, and the Western Isles soon became Hebrides 
a favourite resort of the Vikings. In the colsM^f'^ 
Keltic annals these unwelcome visitors had Scotland. 
gained the name of Fingall, ' the white strangers,' from 
the fairness of their "Complexion ; and Dugall, the black 
strangers, probably from the iron coats of mail worn by 
their chiefs. From the intermixture of the Kelts and 
Northmen sprang a race called the Gall- Gael, who 
joined the Northmen in their raids, or plun- 
dered on their own account. In the year 795 plundered, 
we find them sacking the monastery of lona, 795- 
once the centre of religious vitality in the North. 

By the end of the ninth century a sort of naval 
empire had arisen, consisting of the Hebrides, Naval 
parts of the western coasts of Scotland, espe- g^J* ^7 '\i 
cially the modern Argyllshire, Man, Anglesea, century. 
and the eastern shores of Ireland. 

This empire was under a line of sovereigns who 
called themselves the Hy-Ivar (grandsons of Ivar), and 
lived now in Man, now in Dublin. Thence they often 
joined their kinsmen in their attacks on England, and 
at times aspired to the position of Jarls of the Danish 
Northumbria. It may seem strange that a kingdom so 
widely scattered should have held together ; but the sea 
was their highway, and by it communication was far 



24 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

easier at that date than by land. Moreover, it is pro- 
bable that the independence of the several isles was 
greater than the scanty records which we have allow. 

At the close of the tenth and beginning of the eleventh 
century the battles of Taja and Clontarf overthrew the 
■J Battles of powcr of these Norsemen (or Ostmen as they 
arTd^Ckm- Were Called) in Ireland, and restored the 
tarf, 1014. authority of the native Irish sovereign. 
About this time they became Christians, and in the year 
1066 we find one of their princes joining Harald Hardrada 
\ of Norway in his invasion of England, which ended so dis- 
astrously in the battle of Stamford Bridge. Magnus of 
Norway, thirty-two years later, after subduing the inde- 
pendent Jarls of Shetland and the Orkneys, attempted 
to reassert his supremacy along the western coast. But 
after conquering Anglesea, whence he drove out the Nor- 
Attempt of nians who had just made a settlement there, 
Magnus of j^g crosscd to Ireland to meet his death in 

JNorway to . 

restore the battle. The Sovereignty of the I sles was then 
Norvvayy restored to its original owners, but soon after 
1098. split into two parts — the Suderies and Nor- 

deries (whence the term Sodor and Man), north and 
south of Ardnamurchan Point. 

The next glimpse we have of these dominions is at 
the close of the twelfth century, when we find them under 
Somarled; a chief named Somarled, who exercised 
twelfth'^^^ authority in the islands and Argyleshire, and 
century. from him the clans of the Highlands and the 

Western Isles love to trace their ancestry. After his 
<ieath, according to the Highland traditions, the islands 
Battle of ^^^ Argyleshire were divided amongst his 
Largs, 1263. three sons. Thus the old Norse empire was 
Scotland, finally broken up, and in the thirteenth century, 
^^^^- after another unsuccessful attempt by Haco, 

King of Norway, to re-establish the authority of the m.other 



8oo-i28i. The Invasions of the Northmen. 25 

kingdom over their distant possessions, an attempt which 
ended in his defeat at the battle of Largs by the Scottish 
king, Alexander III., they were ceded to the Marriage of 
Scottish kings by Magnus IV., his son, and and Eric, 
an alliance was cemented between the two ^^^^* 
kingdoms by the marriage of Alexander's daughter, Mar- 
garet, to Eric of Norway. 

IV. Meanwhile the Northmen had discovered Iceland. 
The first discoverers were a Viking named Naddod, and 
Gardar, a Swede ; and they, returning home, Iceland 
praised the land. They had climbed a high Faroe. 

^ ,, , . , ./-I Greenland. 

fell on the eastern side to see if there were 
any signs of men — but saw none. The friths, they said, 
were full of fish. In some of the fields in the summer-/ 
time butter dropped from every blade of grass. But the 
winter was cold, and towards the north they had seen 
frith after frith packed with drift ice. Hence they called 
it Iceland. It was evidently a secluded place, quiet, and 
scarce trodden by the foot of man. When therefore Harald 
Harfagr had driven the peaceful proprietors from their 
home, by his heavy hand, and --had even subdued the 
Orkneys and the Shetlands, those who were weary of 
these feuds sailed north to Iceland and Faroe, and 
sought rest in those quiet lands. Ingolf Y\r?x 
Arnavson came first, in 874, and settled at colony, 874. 
Rykyavik ; and others soon followed him. Thus the 
colonisation of^ Iceland seems to differ somewhat from 
the other settlements of the Northmen. 

The few inhabitants found there, probably Kelts, 
did not offer much opportunity for spoil ; and th^ least 
warlike of the Northmen were attracted thither. To Ice- 
land they transferred their system of clan government, 
which they had enjoyed in Norway before the rise of 
the domestic feuds, and estabUshed it with some modi- 
fications. 



26 The Noi^7nans in Europe. a.d. 

The country was well suited to such a state of society, 
cut up as it is by desert tracts and raging watercourses ; 
where each valley is separated from the next by lonely 
heaths, snow-clad fells, and plains of barren lava. 

As the number of the colonists increased, however, 
changes were introduced. Over the district assemblies 
Establish- an All-thing was established. This, the 
AU-thin *^^^ common Assembly for the whole island, met 
930. in the plain of the All-thing, in the south of 

the country. A code was drawn up, and a Lawman 
elected as President of the Assembly. Here laws were 
passed, and private suits eventually decided before judges 
appointed by the Lawman. If the parties were not 
satisfied, a last appeal lay to their trial combat. These 
were fought on an island in the river hard by, and 
were regulated by a code of honour. 

The executive was entrusted to a ' Court of Laws ' 
{Logretta), the members of which were the Lawman and 
Court of twelve judges of district courts or assemblies, 

Laws. who were chieftains and priests besides. This 

Court of Laws, sitting in the Hall of Laws — declared the 
law, voted public grants, elected the Lawman, and de- 
cided questions affecting the community at large. 

Thus, practically, the government was an aristocratic 
republic ; and the real power lay in the hands of the 
chief men of each district, who alone could be judges, the 
Lawman, and members of the Court of Laws. 

Every freeman might indeed challenge their decisions, 
and by his simple prohibition render the decrees of the 
Court of Laws illegal ; but by this he was sure to incur 
the wrath of the powerful families, and the right was not 
often exercised. The power was^ there is no doubt, vir- 
tually in the hands of an aristocracy ; and the abolition 
of combat on the introduction of Christianity in the 
eleventh century, placed the freemen still more in the 



862-879- The Invasions of the Northmen. 27 

hands of the judges and their assessors ; but their con- 
dition was at least superior to that of their class in other 
countries at that date : individual freedom was but httle 
interfered with, and their life seems to have been pros- 
perous and happy. It was here that the Scandinavian 
literature was preserved, and, as before mentioned, that" 
the elder and younger Eddas were compiled by 
Soemund Sigfusson and Snorro Sturleson. 

From Iceland the Northmen discovered Greenland, 
and settled there in 981. Perhaps the reason for this 
may be found in the gradual increase of aristo- Greenland, 
cratic privilege in Iceland, However that 981- 
may be, a prosperous colony was established there, which 
lasted until the colonists were all destroyed by the great 
plague which swept over Europe in the fourteenth century; 
and, if the traditions be true, some sailed thence and dis- 
covered Vinland or America. 

Meanwhile, in Iceland, the power of the chieftains 
increased, and— a sure sign of this — in the latter half of 
the twelfth century jealousies sprang up Iceland oc- 
between them. Then the prosperity of the kings of 
colony rapidly declined, and, in the middle of thirteenth 
the thirteenth century it was occupied by the century. 
King of Norway, and the republic destroyed. 

V. The settlement of the Northmen in Russia is too 
large a subject, and lies so far out of our ^ undation 
way that the briefest notice must suffice. of kingdom 

While the Western Seas had been the 
scene of the exploits chiefly of the Danes and Norsemen, 
the Swedes had taken to the Baltic, and spoiled or 
levied tribute from the Sclavonic tribes along the coast. 

In the year 862, Ruric, a Swede, was called -^^^^^ \^ 
in by the Sclavonic tribes to settle their dis- Russia. 
putes. ' Our land is large and rich,' the sup- ^ ' 

pliants said, ' but order in it there is none. Do ye come 



28 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

and rule over us.' Ruric, thus invited, came, and occu- 
pied Novgorod, while his followers settled at Kief. 

After Ruric's death, Oleg, his kinsman and guardian 
of his young son Igor, overcame the independent princes 
Kief, of Kief, which henceforth became the capital 

capital. q£- j^ussia. Here, rapidly amalgamating with 

their subjects, the descendants of Ruric long held the 
title of Grand Prince. 

In the tenth century they established commercial 
Commercial relations with Constantinople. Sailing down 
between the Dnieper, they reached the Euxine and 
Constant?-^ the Hellespont ; and in the markets of Con- 
nopie. stantinople exchanged the commodities of the 

North — furs, hides, and slaves — for the corn, wine, and 
oil of the sunny South. 

The riches of the empire soon excited their jealousy, 
and these friendly relations were exchanged for those of 
Attacks on enmity. In a period of 190 years, the Rus- 
Constanti- sians made four attempts to plunder the 
865—1043. Imperial city, and though eventually unsuc- 
cessful, were only defeated under the very walls. ' They 
dragged,' we are told, ' their ships ashore, and mounting 
them on wheels sailed on dry land up to the gates.' 

At the end of the tenth century Vladimir, the de- 
scendant of Oleg and then Grand Prince of Russia, 
Vladimir married the sister of the Eastern Emperor 
becomes a Basil, and became a convert to Christianity. 

Christian. ' . - , ~ . 

988. The Sclavonic translations of the Scriptures, 

written by Cyril and Methodius in the ninth century, 
passed into Russia and became the national Bible of the 
Russians. 

Connexion During the reign of his descendant Yaroslaf, 

between ^^ connexion between the princely house of 

Russia and 

the West. Russia and the Scandinavians of the West 
was close. St. Olaf of Norway and the Russian prince 



IOOO-I066. The Invasions of the Northmen. 29 

had both married daughters of Olaf, King of Sweden. 
At his court the saint had found a refuge when driven out 
by Canute of England ; 

' King Olaf eastward over the sea 
To Russia's monarch had to flee : ' 

and on Olaf's final defeat and death at the battle of 
Sticklestad, his only son, Magnus, found a 
shelter at his uncle's court, whence he re- 
turned to overthrow Sweyn, the son of Canute, and 
regain the throne of Norway. Hither, too, 
another fugitive had come — Harald Hardrada, 
the half-brother of St. Olaf, who, though only a boy of 
fifteen, had fought in the battle of Sticklestad. 

Since the beginning of the tenth century, the Emperors 
of the East, anxious to secure the assistance of these 
stalwart warriors of the North, had enticed some of 
them south and formed them into a body-guard under 
the name of the Varangians, (Var, oath — r^^^ 
Vseringjar — ^apayyoi). Bound by an oath to Varangian 
the Emperor, and placed under a strict military 
code, they enjoyed great privileges. They kept watch at 
the door of the imperial bedchamber, and lodged in the 
palace itself; and at the death of the Emperor had the 
curious privilege of roaming at will through the imperial 
treasury and carrying off what they would. 

To Constantinople Harald came, and, in the service 
of the Emperor, led the Varangian Guard Harald 

, _ • X- 1 r- • 1 joins the 

agamst the Saracens m Egypt and Syria, thus Varangian 

anticipating the future deeds of the Nor- ^^j^^'^ 

mans in the Crusades ; and saw Greece and Expeditions 

Italy, where he fought with his distant kins- Saracens 

men the Normans, who were already settled in ^"^ Sicily. 
' ■' 10^3-1041. 

Italy. Returns to 

In this service he gained a wide-spread fame 1044. 
and amassed an enormous treasure. Then, quarrelling with 



30 The Normans in Europe, a.d. 

his master the Emperor, he went back to Russia to marry 
Elizabeth, the daughter of Yaroslaf. 

Thence he returned to Norway, to share that king- 
dom with Magnus the Good, his nephew, till the death 
of his rival left him the sole possession of the 

Divides ,, . , 

Norway Norwegian throne. 

Magnus Nineteen years afterwards, as we shall 

1047. see, he crossed to England, to claim that 

Harald . o 7 

Hardrada, kingdom from Harold, the son of Godwine, 
sole king of and to end his strange life at the battle of 

JN orway ^ 

1047. Stamford Bridge. 

England, Meanwhile in Russia Yaroslaf had died, 

at'stamford ^^ ^^ succecded by Ysevold, and then by 
Bridge. Vladimir II., who once more came west for 

a bride, and married Githa, the daughter of 
the English Harold, Hardrada's foe. 

Here we must take leave of Russia, still in the hands 
of the descendants of Ruric, who were to hold the crown 
for yet five hundred years. 



CHAPTER III. 

THE SETTLEMENT IN GAUL. 

The great event of the ninth century is the fall of the 
ill-cemented empire raised by Charles the Great ; that 
Northmen of the tenth, the rise of the national kingdoms 
in Gaul. of Germany, France, and Italy. In these 

two events the Northmen had their share ; they rose with 
the fall of the Karolings, and became firmly established 
with the rise of modern France. 

Their invasions, beginning about the year 799, ran 
very much the same course as those of the Danes in 
England, and about the same time changed their cha- 



-912. The Settlement in Gaul, 31 

racter from predatory incursions to definite settlements. 
Indeed, in many cases the invasions are contemporaneous, 
and the same names appear now in England, now abroad. -- 
We have already alluded to the wide extent of their 
devastations and the terror they inspired, but to under- 
stand in any way the miseries which Gaul, Ger- Misery in 
many, and Italy endured during this period, we q^™^"/^! 
must remember that these countries were torn Italy' conse- 
by the most deadly internal feuds, which pre- break-up of 
vented any united action against the common ^^^,^^?*''^ 

•' ° of the West. 

foe. The children of Charles the Great were 888-912. 
fighting for the spoils of his wide empire, and violating 
all right, justice, and plighted faith ; other competitors 
were joining the strife and struggling for their share. The 
people, down-trodden, neglected, oppressed, or treated 
as so many conscripts who could be hurried to the battle- 
field, were grouping themselves for protection's sake 
round a host of greedy, selfish nobles, or sinking down 
and increasing the number of the slaves. Such was the 
internal condition of the countries — a meaningless, hope- 
less tale of hateful factions, which loads the memory and 
sickens the heart, and amid which only one important 
principle struggles to the surface — namely, the rising cry 
of nationality, protesting against these personal quarrels 
and selfish compacts, and demanding that the interest of 
people, and not of kings, should decide the boundaries 
of the land. Sadly was Europe expiating the attempt of 
Charles to raise an Empire of the West, an attempt which 
came too early or too late. Nor was this all. A triple 
scourge aggravated these self-inflicted sores, contem- 
While the Northmen harassed the coasts and vo^^ry 

inroads of 

river shores, the Hungarian cavalry from the Northmen, 
East swept over Germany, passed the Rhine, rian"fand 
and penetrated as far as Vermandois and Saracens. 
Provence ; crossed the Alps, and devoured the Lombard 



32 The Normans i7t Europe. a.d. 

plains. Meanwhile from the Mediterranean and from 
Spain the Saracens harassed the south of Gaul, and 
joined the Hungarians in Provence and the Alps. Of the 
Misery of Condition of the lower classes we know but 
the people. little. History has recorded the cruelties, the 
virtues, the honours and dishonours, the victories, the 
defeats of the great ; but about the poorer classes she is 
generally silent, or at best has but a stammering tale to tell. 
We may quote, however, the words of the later author of 
the Romance of Rollo : 'What do we see around? Churches 
burning, people slaughtered, through the weakness of 
the king. The Northmen wreak their will in France. 
From Blois to Senlis not a grain of corn, and no one 
dares to labour in field or vineyard. If war cease not, 
famine is at our doors.' This poem was not written till 
the twelfth century, but the author borrows from earlier 
writers, and we m.ay believe that his words were true 
enough. Well might the choirs of the South chant their 
petition : ' From the arrows of the Hungarians may the 
Lord deliver us!' and those of the North answer in 
despairing cadence : ' From the fury of the Northmen 
save us. Lord ! ' 

The incursions of the Northmen in Gaul naturally 
fall into three groups, guided by the great rivers and 
Geographi- intervening shores. i. The North Expe- 
cal division (^jtion, which includes the territories around 

of tbe settle- ' 

ments. the Rhine, the Scheldt, and the Elbe, the 

farthest southern point being the Neckar and the Rhine. 
2. The districts of the Loire and Garonne, reaching as 
Difference ^'^^ west as Spain, and inland as far as Bourges. 
between n Those of the Seine, Somme, and Oise. 

Scandina- ^ . . ^ 

Yian settle- The mvasions of Gaul by the Northmen 

England differ from those of England by the Danes 
and Gaul. j^ onc material point. Numerous as they 
were, they were isolated and scattered ; those of the 



888-912. The Settlement in Gaul. 33 

Danes in England continuous. Consequently the latter 
permanently occupied one half of England, and, though 
becoming Englishmen, still retained a certain local exist- 
ence, and remained more or less distinct until the Norman 
Conquest. 

But the settlers in Gaul, lying in small, isolated groups, 
and but little recruited by new comers, soon became 
entirely merged in the surrounding nationality, and lost 
their individuality. Hence it is that one settlement alone 
that of RoUo at Rouen, in any sense survived, all the rest 
being rapidly lost to history. Even here it is not as 
Northmen but as Frenchmen that the settlers are im- 
portant. The followers of Rollo became French and 
assumed the language, and so rapidly did the change 
occur, in the court at least, that the grandson of Rollo 
had to be sent to the district of Bayeux, which longest 
retained its Scandinavian character, to learn the language 
of his forefathers. 

Remembering, then, that the incursions of the North- 
men, though they had a terrible reality while they lasted, 
were but in few cases permanent in their result, we may 
at once dismiss all but the last. 

The mouth of the Seine offered a tempting opening to 
the pirates as they skirted the shores of Gaul, and the 
commercial city of Rouen had early attracted rj^^ g^j^^^ 
their plimdering expeditions. Gaining bold- settlements, 
ness, they pressed inland, and continually threatened 
Paris, then a town on the frontier of the kingdom of the 
West Franks, whose capital lay at Laon. So frequent 
were these piratical invasions that in 861 ^^^-^^ ^ 
Charles the Bald granted the city and a large ' March ' 
district round it to Robert the Strong as a Northment 
March or border territory against the North- ^^^• 
men. From that day forth the destinies of Paris began 
to rise, at first against the Normans, and then in league 
M. H, D 



34 The Normans in Europe. a. d. 

with them, until, by the accession of Hugh Capet, she 
finally became the capital, and her Count the first king, 
of modern France. 

Fifteen years afterwards, according to the chronicles, 
RoUo, the future Duke of Normandy, entered the Seine, 
and from that day till 912 ravaged the un- 
° °' ^ ' fortunate country. This Rollo, termed the 
Ganger or Walker, because he was too tall and stout for 
any horse to bear, is, so far as his earlier exploits are con- 
cerned, somewhat a legendary hero. The son of Rognwald, 
Jarl of Mori in Norway, he came of a family of Vikings. 
His brother-in-law, Einar, was, as we have seen, Jarl of 
the Orkneys. Rollo is described as following the calHng 
of a Viking in Gaul and England for nearly forty years 
before his final settlement at Rouen. He is said to have 
joined Guthrum in his wars against Alfred, but to have 
been persuaded by the Saxon king to leave England, and 
seek richer spoil in France. His exploits are spread over 
so many years, that it seems likely that there were two 
men of the same name whose deeds have been confounded. 
To add to our difficulty, there is a gap in the contem- 
porary chronicles from 900 to 911. We must therefore 
be contented to leave him as we find him, a hero of 
romance, and follow the accounts left us by the chroniclers 
and sagas. In the year 888, the fatal year which saw the 
final dismemberment of the empire of Charles the Great, 
began the famous siege of Paris by Rollo. The town was, 
however, successfully defended by its Count, Eudes, who 
in reward was for a time chosen king of France. When 
the chroniclers speak again, we find Rollo in possession of^ 
Rouen, and Gaul in a pitiable state. In spite of his defeat 
by the Count of Paris, Rollo's devastations continued, 
until at last Charles the Simple granted him by treaty 
the territories which were already his own, and thus, as 
Alfred the Great had done for England, gained a respite 



912. The Settlement in Gaul. 35 

for the distracted country. By this treaty of Clair on 
Epte, Rollo secured the country from the Epte 
to the sea, and the over-lordship of Brittany, grantecrto" 
with the hand of Gisela, the daughter of ^^aty of 
Charles the Simple, and, accepting Christianity Clair on 
as the price of the treaty, was led to the font 
by Robert, Count of Paris, who consented to be his god- 
father. To the demand of Charles that Rollo should do 
homage to him and kiss his toe, the independent North- 
man answered indignantly, '■ Ne si, by Got ' (Not so, by 
God). When at last he consented that it should be done 
by proxy, it is said that King Charles was thrown backwards 
by the rudeness of the Danish soldier, as he raised his 
foot to kiss it. The tale probably points to a real act of 
homage done by Rollo ; but the Normans of later date 
appealed to it to show that they held their country of no 
higher so vereign-in- chief, but of God alone, and were 
proud of an insult offered with impunity to a descendant 
of the great Emperor of the West. 

As to the internal condition of the province after the 
occupation, it is impossible to speak with certainty. The 
land, we are told, was ' roped ' out among his 
followers. Most probably the Northmen be- condition of 
came the only land-owners, while the con- Normandy. 
quered race was reduced to a state of serfdom. The 
country seems to have been divided into counties, and 
bestowed upon the chief advisers of Rollo, but in the 
absence of written documents of any kind during the 
reigns of the first two dukes, it is idle to speculate on the 
political condition of the dukedom. The legend, which 
under various forms so often appears in many countries, 
that the duke's bracelets hung to a tree and, unguarded 
except by the terror of his name, remained untouched for 
full three years, attests the vigilance of his government. 
Towns and churches rose again under his paternal sway, 



36 The Nonnmis in Eitrope. a.d. 

and the fame of Rollo the pirate was soon lost in that of 
Rollo the legislator and father of his people. 

Leaving Rollo definitely settled at Rouen, let us look 
around us and consider the condition of that part of 
Condition Western Europe in which Rollo and his suc- 
^ Western ccssors were to play so important a part. 
912. Geography, which in early times is history, 

had cried out against the empire of Charles the Great, 
and national aspirations triumphed at last. After the 
death oi Charles III., who had for a moment re- 
Dismember- united the dominions of the Emperor Charles 
ment of |-]^g Great, the ill-assorted elements were 

Empire of ^ ^ ^ . , . , 

the West, for ever separated, and four kmgdoms arose 
Rise of —I, Germany; 2, Italy; 3, Burgundy; 4, 

separate Q-3.vX. Of these Germany fell into a kind 

kmgdoras. 

Germany. of loosc federation of four nations — Fran- 
conia, Saxony, Swabia, Bavaria, with their separate laws 
and their own dukes, each of which in turn gave a king- to 
. ,j. Germany. On the death of Arnulf, an ille- 

896-912. gitimate descendant of Charles the Great who 
Franconk, had been chosen king, Conrad of Franconia, 
912-918. acknowledged by all the nations except 

Lotharingia, obtained the crown, and the same year 
which saw Rollo established in Normandy saw Germany 
transferred to her national kings. He was 
SaTony° succccdcd by Henry I., of the house of 

918-936. Saxony. Both these were descended by the 

female side from Charles the Great ; but the rise of the 
power of Saxony, the emperor's most deadly foe, rather 
points to the final exclusion of his race fiom Germany. 

. ,, Italy and the Empire, generally but not 

the Empire, always hanging together, were tossed like 
q62.° "' shuttlecocks to and fro, until Otho I. de- 

Papacy scended from Germany and claimed the Im- 

perial and the Iron Crown ; and th€ Papacy, passing into 



-912. The Settlement in Gatcl. 37 

the hands of a succession of infamous popes, the para- 
mours and bastard sons of two shameless women, bade 
fair to lose all moral influence in Europe. 

At this time there were two kingdoms of Burgundy. 

1. Transjurane, consisting of North Savoy Two king- 
and all Switzerland between the Reuss and domsof 

Jburguncly. 

the Jura, then under one king named Rudolf. 888-912. 

2. Cisjurane Burgundy, consisting of Provence, Dauphind, 
the south of Savoy, and the country between the Saone 
and the Jura, afterwards called The County of Burgundy, 
or Tranche Comte. This kingdom, founded by Boso of 
Provence in 879, was then in the hands of his lq^js of 
son Louis, who, after gaining the country west Provence 
of the Rhone and most of Languedoc, had as- ^ ^^ ' 
pired to the dangerous bauble of the Empire. He was 
half blinded by his rival, Berengar, and returned home to 
live in retirement till his death. His dominions ^ , ,... 

r 1-11 • ,- Rudolf II. 

soon alter passed, with the exception of Dau- 937. 

phin^, to his more successful neighbour, and, under Rudolf 

IL, became the kingdom of Arles=^ 

Gaul, on the death of Charles HI., becomes for 

just 100 years the object of contention between the last 

of the Karolings and the rising house of Capet, 

between the Imperial German-speaking city Object of 

of Laon and the ducal French-speaking city between"" 

of Paris. At first Eudes, Count of Paris Karolings 

raised to fame by his successful defence of of Paris, 

Paris against the Northmen, was chosen, king, Eud?s.^" 

and although his rivals brought over the youno- 888-899. 

Charles the Simple, the descendant of Charles the 

1 These two kingdoms of Transjurane and Cisjurane Burgundy, 
which subsequently belonged to the Empire, must not be con- 
founded with the Duchy of Burgundy, formed of the country round 
Dijon, east of the river Saone, which always belonged to France 
At this time held by Richard the Justiciar (887-921), it was 
shortly after seized by Hugh the Great of Paris, and became subse- 
quently an appanage of the younger son of Robert, King of France. 



38 The Normans ill Eiir ope. a.d. 

Great, from England, where he had been sent for safety, 
and got him crowned, the Count held his ground success- 
Charles th ^"^^ "^^ ^^^ death in 899. Then Charles 
Simple, quietly succeeded, and the kingdom of the 

Extent of West Franks was once more restored to the 
his king- city of Laon. His kingdom was bounded to 

dom. Ill 

the south and north by the Mediterranean 
and the English Channel, and stretched east and west 
from the Meuse and the Rhone to the Pyrenees. In 
addition to this he held the Channel Islands and the 
County of Barcelona. But of this territory he was by no 
Indepen- means actual master. Brittany and Aquitaine 
Britteny, Scarcely acknowledged his authority, and 
Aquitane, generally stood aloof, while nearer at home 

and the four , . , , , , ^ 

great riis powcr was overshadowed by four great 

Duchy ?r* feudatories who often set him at nought. In 
Burgundy, the south the duchy of Burgundy was held by 
County'of Richard the Justiciar. In the north the County 
Flanders. ^f jTianders, formed as a March by Charles the 
Bald against the Northmen, was now under Baldwin 
the Bold, a powerful and turbulent vassal, quarrelling 
with everyone, and disturbing the peace even of the royal 
domain itself 

At Paris, another March, Robert, Duke of France, the 
brother of the king's late rival Eudes, the deadly foe 
of his race and name, ruled over the greater 
Paris, part of Central Gaul north of the Loire, and, as 

899-923. ^g^g then not unfrequently the case, enjoyed 

considerable wealth as lay Abbot of St. Denis and St. 
Germain of Paris, and of St. Martin of Tours. Even the 
narrow extent of the royal domain, composed of a small 
902-943. district round the city of Laon and Com- 

Verman^ piegne, was threatened in the north by Herbert 
dois. II. of Vermandois. This powerful Count, 

descended from Pepin the son of Charles the Great, and 



912. The Settlement in Gaul, 39 

holding the rich territories of Rheims, Soissons, Senlis, 
St. Quentin and Peronne, claimed a purer and more 
certain descent from the Emperor than Charles himself, 
and was only biding his time to become the gaoler, and 
perhaps the murderer, of his king. Lastly 

1 Tv/r . T o r -i-^i • 1 • Metropoh- 

came the Metropolitan bee of Rheims, lying tan See of 
within the territories of Vermandois, yet in- Rheims. 
dependent. Its primate was the Prince Bishop of France, 
and its possession was a continual bone of contention 
between the rival princes. Gaul, in fact, was a loose col- 
lection of powerful princes owing a purely nominal alle- 
giance to their suzerain, which they discarded whenever 
their interests clashed. Perhaps it may be said that 
Charles was more really master of German Lotharingia 
which, refusing to acknowledge the upstart Conrad of 
Franconia, paid a temporary but personal allegiance to 
him as the representative of the Karoling line. Already 
had Charleses authority been disputed by these turbulent 
feudatories, and the quarrel had apparently only been 
discontinued owing to the renewed invasions of the North- 
men which preluded the settlement of Duke Rollo at 
Rouen. 

Such was the condition of Gaul at the time of the treaty 
of Clair on Epte. By this treaty one more 
dangerous vassal was admitted within the settlement 
realm, but the immediate result was a decided °^ Rollo. 
gain to Charles. Plainly it Avas at the expense of the 
Dukes of Brittany and of Paris that the cession was 
made. Charles resigned a territory over which he had 
but little powei", and the two first Norman dukes fully 
repaid the gift by heartily supporting Charles throughout 
the rest of his troubled life. 

The common danger from the Northmen -^^^^ , 
once removed, the quarrels again broke out. quarrels. 
Charles, by the spontaneous allegiance of Lotharingia and 



40 



The Normans in Europe, 



A.D. 



by the aid of the Northmen, had gained an increase of 
strength, and jealousy perhaps was the immediate cause 
of the rebellion. A strong coalition arose. 
Robert of Paris was chosen king, leaning on 
the united powers of Vermandois and Bur- 
gundy. Yet Charles, aided by the people of 
Lotharingia,by Rollo and some Northmen who 
had settled on the Loire, was strong enough 
to win a great battle at Soissons, where 
Robert paid the penalty with his life. Hugh 
the Great, his son, might well have aspired to 
the crown. But now, as throughout his life, he 
preferred the less dangerous position of the 
king-maker, and Rudolf of Burgundy, his 
brother-in-law, accepted the dangerous post. 
Charles the Simple, trusting himself to the 
plighted troth of Herbert of Vermandois, and 
placing himself in his power, was faithlessly 
seized and kept a prisoner, with one short 
interval, until his death. In revenge, Rollo 
ravaged the country of the Duke of Paris, and 
a long war of four years ensued, generally to 
the advantage of the Norman duke. 

This, though it did not open the prison to the royal 
Rollo gains captive, added two important acquisitions to 
Bessin. the Norman territory. The Bessin, the district 

round Bayeux, was granted to Rollo, as well as the 
land of Maine. The claim to the latter was left for Rollo's 
successors to enforce, but of the former he gained imme- 
diate possession, and it henceforth formed the most 
important portion of the duchy. A Saxon colony had 
existed there since the later days of the Roman empire, 
and alone of the Teutonic settlements had resisted the 
absorbing influence of the Romance element. Now, rein- 
forced by the new settlement of a kindred race, it main- 



922. 

Rebellion of 
Robert of 
Paris, 

Herbert of 
Verman- 
dois, and 
Robert of 
Burgundy. 
Charles 
aided by 
Rollo. 

Rebels over- 
thrown at 
Soissons. 

923- 
Death of 
Robert of 
Paris. 
Hugh 
assumes 
character of 
king-maker. 
Rudolf of 
Burgundy 
pretender. 
Charles 
the Simple 
taken 
prisoner. 
923-927. 



927-932. ^^^^ Settlement in Gaul. 41 

tained its Teutonic character and speech. In the reign 
of Rollo's successor it formed the nucleus of a rebeUion 
of the non- Romanised element of the duchy against the 
other, then become thoroughly French. To it his grandson 
was sent to learn the pure language of his fathers, and to 
this day it retains many features of its Saxon and Scandi- 
navian origin. 

The annexation of the Bessin was the last exploit of 
Rollo. Shortly afterwards, at the demand of his people, 
he resigned, though unwillingly, in favour of his -^^w^ 
son. Five years more, it is said, he lived, and abdicates in 
then the old man of fourscore and odd years — . son, and 
years teeming with deeds of strange contrast, '^^^^' 932- 
of stranger import to future times — disappears from his- 
tory. As we stand over his tomb in the chapel of St. Ro- 
manus at Rouen, strange are the thoughts which flit across 
our mind. Here lies the once dread Viking, the pillager 
of France ; then one of the most powerful of her sons, a 
duke, a legislator; the father of his people, the progenitor 
of along line of dukes and kings. When all is told, we know 
but little of him. Many of the rolls which would have 
recorded his fame were probably burnt by his own hand. 
To recall all the events of his varied life is now beyond 
the power of man; but the best proof of his power and his 
genius is, that it was his life that inspired a canon of his 
own town Bayeux to write one of the earliest romances 
of modern Europe, and that while all other settlements of 
the race in France and Germany rapidly disappeared, 
his alone has lasted on and deeply affected future ages. 



42 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 



CHAPTER IV. 

WILLIAM LONGSWORD. 

The change of rulers at Rouen in no way altered the 

attitude of parties with regard to the question of the 

crown. Charles the Simple lived till 929, . 

William when he died in prison — as some said, 

poisoned. By this event Rudolf should 

have been left in quiet enjoyment of his throne, but 

Death of this was not the object of Herbert of Verman- 

Simpfe^ "^^^ dois, wliose support of him had all along 

929- been selfish. Herbert's one aim had been to 

weaken the royal power and increase his own. While, 

therefore, Charles lived, he was the liegeman of Rudolf; 

Herbert of whcn Charles died Rudolf was his bitterest 

Vermandois enemy. Nor were the other great men of 

against France much better. The difference was of 

Rudolf. degree, not of kind. If Herbert was perjured 

and faithless, Hugh was a designing, ambitious man, 

refusing the crown only because he feared its dangerous 

honour, and because he saw that true power lay in the 

hands of a skilful king-maker. Arnulf of Flanders was 

prepared for any crime ; and William Long- 
Selfishness 111 1 • • 1 1 
of all sword, the best among his rivals, was but a 

concerned. fickle, changeable man. To make matters 

worse, all these nobles were allied by ties of blood and 

of marriage, which seemed only to embitter the strife. 

Thus Gaul was the victim of a series of hateful family 

quarrels. Hence the endless, aimless struggle continues, 

and the history becomes terribly confused. Such must 

often be the case when the only principle followed is that 

of narrow self-interest, self-aggrandisement; and this, in 

the narrowest, most selfish sense, was the aim of one and all. 

Nor were there wanting other causes of dispute. At 



927-936. William Longsword. 43 

this time, sovereigns, princes, and counts were all trying to 
appropriate to theniselves the revenues of the Competi- 
rich abbeys and benefices, as Robert of Paris segof^*^^^ 
had done, or make them hereditary in their Rheims. 
families. At this date the important Metropolitan See of 
Rheims was actually in the dominions of Herbert, and it 
had long been his darling object to put his son into it. 
Having poisoned the Archbishop, he at last Herbert's 
gained his end ; and the boy of five years old Ar^M)tfho 
was shamefully foisted into the See, and made at age of 5. 
to lisp the responses at his institution. We have from a 
contemporary a naive description of the ludicrous yet 
shocking scene which followed these youthful conse- 
crations, frequent at that period. The child, taught to 
repeat the responses or spell them if he could not get 
them by heart, usually behaved pitiably, sometimes 
breaking out into a whimper in dread of the accustomed 
chastisement for not knowing his lesson. For the vio- 
lation of all decency Herbert's adversaries probably cared 
little, but they resented the dangerous increase of his 
power, and opposed his boy-bishop. 

The quarrel continued, and Rudolf, though supported 
by Aquitaine, Hugh of Paris, and William Rudolf 
Longsword, only held a precarious position t)yAqui- 
till his death, 936. No sooner had this occur- wilHam 
red than the turbulent feudatories, impatient Longsword, 
of a master who was one of themselves, de- of Paris, 
termined to have a king, and there still remained ^°^^^ ^ 

o7 , precarious 

a Karoling prince to represent the royal line, position un- 
^dgifu, the wife of the unfortunate Charles, 936. 
upon her husband's imprisonment, had fled dSre-mer 
with her young son hidden in a truss of made king. 
hay, to the court of her brother, the great Athelstan, 
under whose sheltering power England became the home 
of all unfortunate exiles. This son, Lewis ' d'Outre-mer ' 



44 TJie Normans in Europe. a.d. 

(from beyond the sea), was now recalled, and, in a great 
council, invested with the royal authority ; Hugh of Paris 
again refusing the proffered honour, and preferring the post 
of guardian to the young king. Thus, then, was the throne 
of France for the last time restored to the Karoling line. 

In the hope of keeping some sort of thread through 
this miserable civil war, we have carried our sketch of it 
without a break to the date of Lewis d'Outre-mer's acces- 
sion. We must now return and treat of the internal 
affairs of the duchy, 

Brittany had been nominally granted to Rollo by 
Charles the Simple at the treaty of Clair on Epte, but 
^ , „ Charles in so doing had granted that over 

Revolt of ,.,,,, ^ ^ ^ r^, -r^ 

Brittany, which he had no real power. The Bretons, 
930-932. proud of their Keltic descent, proud of having 

escaped the all-embracing empire of Charles the Great, 
resented this act. The want of unity between the various 
provinces had hitherto kept them quiet. They had per- 
force submitted to the continued devastations of the 
Northmen from the sea, who were seeking to carve out 
dependencies for themselves as Rollo had done, and to 
the galling yoke of the Norman duke. But now, roused 
by the change of rulers at Rouen, they rose under 
two of their princes, Berenger and Alan, massacred the 
Northmen in their country, and invaded the Norman 
duchy, William, however, completely crushed the revolt, 
Revolt Berenger submitted, Alan fled to the court 

suppressed, of Athelstan, and when restored, on the in- 
tercession of the latter, was forced to accept the terms 
Cotentin imposed by the conqueror at the first suppres- 
and Channel sioft of the rebellion. The result was an im- 

Islands . . . 

ceded to portant increase of the Norman territory by 

iSpmanS t^^ acquisition of the Cotentin and the Chan- 
of this. nel Islands, and the formal acknowledgment 

of the Norman supremacy over the rest of Brittany. 



930-933- William Lo7igsword. 45 

The door was thus opened to further conquests in the 
east and south, in Maine and Brittany. Normandy, 
advanced to the sea-board on the Avest, gained a boundary, 
important as well for its physical characteristics as for its 
two harbours ; the dangerous Barfleur to the east, and 
the important Cherbourg to the west, marked out by the 
Romans as a stronghold, from whence perhaps it gained 
its name, Csesaris Burgus, and now the most important 
port of Northern France. The district thus acquired 
formed the kernel of Norman nationality which sent forth 
in later times the conqueror of Apulia and Sicily, and 
many of the leaders in William the Conqueror's army. 

The Channel Islands from that day forward belonged 
to the Norman dukes, were transferred to England at 
the Conquest, were retained when John lost Normandy, 
and to this day, though French in speech, remain English 
in heart and allegiance, forming distinct commonwealths 
dependent on the English crown, but sending no repre- 
sentative to Parliament, and enjoying a legislative indepen- 
dence perhaps unequalled by any island immediately 
round our coasts, if we except the Isle of Man. 

We have seen how completely the followers of Rollo 
had thrown themselves into the dynastic 932-33. 
quarrels of their adopted country, and assumed Revolt of 
the language and the manners of Frenchmen, party. 
One district alone, the lately acquired district round 
Bayeux, formed the exception, and this now became the 
nucleus for the disaffected spirits. Here collected those 
who thought it shame to cast off their old gods, their 
leaders to victory, and the language which they had learnt 
at their mother's knee. Their connexion with the Danish 
part of England, the fiords of Norway, and the coasts of 
Denmark had apparently by no means ceased, and the 
new comers fostered the old Northman spirit of indepen- 
dence at Bayeux. 



4^ The Novmmis in Eu7'ope. a.d. 

Of the amalgamation with the Franks^ William Long- 
epee was a thorough representative. Born of a Frankish 
mother, he had been taught to consider himself a West 
Frank, and had been brought up as such. Indeed, his 
very character, his fickleness, brilliancy, and impulsiveness, 
all proclaim his Frankish rather than his Norse de'scent, 
while the legend that he was, in his later days, with diffi- 
culty dissuaded from becoming a monk, shows that he had 
embraced Christianity with all the sincerity of which he 
was capable. As such he was hated by the Danish party, 
and the death of Rollo seemed to give them an oppor- 
tunity for revolt. It is not impossible that the struggle 
may bear some analogy to the later dissensions in the 
northern kingdoms themselves. There we find Chris- 
tianity supported by the kings who are aiming at centrali- 
sation and organisation^, while the minor princes fight for 
paganism and independence. The result in Normandy 
was a formidable rebellion which threatened to overthrow 
the ducal power, and to confine the French language and 
religion to Evreux and Rouen. William showed for a time 
the greatest weakness. The terms which he had stooped 
to offer having been rejected, William, in despair, thought 
of leaving Normandy till, encouraged by the bravery of 
Bernard the Dane, his father's trusted adviser, with that 
strange changeableness which seems to have been with him 
a physical as well as a moral failing, he suddenly became 
brave as a lion, pounced on the rebels, and utterly routed 
Effect of them. The danger he had escaped seems 
this revolt to have had an important influence on Wil- 

on William ,• , -, , , . . , , 

Longsword's liam's conduct, both m internal and ex- 
pohcy. ternal affairs, and in fact to explain the in- 

consistencies of his later life. At first he strove to crush 
out the Danish party, and to become more 

933- 

thoroughly French than ever. Hence, perhaps, 
his adhesion given to Rudolf at this date, and his re- 



934. 



William Longsword. 47 



pudiation of the lovely Esprota, his first wife, whom he 
had married by Danish rite — that is, without 
religious ties — for Leutgarda, sister of Herbert '^^^' 
of Vermandois, and his neglect of Richard, Esprota's 
son. His object then was to gain the favour of the 
Frankish nobles. To this we may perhaps also attribute 
his closer connexion with the Church, and, contrary to 
his usual niggardly habits, his foundation of the abbey 
of Jumieges. His vain attempts to gain lasting alliances 
in that faithless age did not succeed ; nay, his own fickle- 
ness, his turn-coat policy, utterly prevented success. 
Thus, while he alienated the Danish party, he had 
not succeeded in making friends amongst his allies 
and relations ; they hated him as the captain of the 
pirates, and he knew it. Therefore, just at the end of his 
life, we notice a sudden change of policy. A fresh incur- 
sion of Danes took place, and he welcomed their arrival 
and allowed them to settle peaceably in the newly acquired 
district of the Cotentin. His son Richard, suddenly 
emerging from obscurity, became the darling of his father, 
was entrusted to William's old tutor, Botho, the Danish- 
born, and Bernard the Dane, and sent to Bayeux to be 
instructed in the Danish tongue. This change, we may 
well believe, contributed to his ruin. There had long 
been a bitter enmity between William and his jealous and 
wicked neighbour Arnulf. The two rivals had married 
sisters, daughters of Herbert of Vermandois, but at that 
time such alliances served but to embitter the t 1 

Jealousy 

Strife. The Count of Flanders was not likely between 
to look upon the nest of pirates, as they called ancT™^" ^ 
the Normans, with a favourable eye. Already Glanders. 
causes of jealousy had occurred. Arnulf had offered a 
refuge to the defeated Breton rebels ten years before, and 
William in revenge had aided the Count of Ponthieu 
whose dominions lay between Normandy and Flanders, 



48 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

and whose country Arnulf had coveted. Now WiUiam 
was allying himself with the Northmen, who were again 
stirring and troubling England and Gaul by 
^^^' their renewed incursions. They were evidently 

again becoming dangerous, and William, in league with 
Lewis, might well be preparing fresh troubles for Gaul. A 
dangerous coalition was arising, so Arnulf argued, and so 
the other princes thought, to which Lewis was perhaps 
lending himself, and of which William was the soul and 
centre. One remedy remained, a rude and decisive one : 
William must be murdered. Such, probably, 
wniianr"^*^ were the main causes which led to the myste- 
Longsword rious assassination of William. In that deed 
Arnulf of Arnulfnodoubtwas the prime mover ; the actual 
Flanders. assassin was, probably, one of the old Breton 
rebels who had the blood of relatives to avenge, but Hugh, 
at least, seems to have secretly favoured it. The plot 
Dec, 942. being laid, William was treacherously invited 
Murder of ^^ ^ negotiation with Arnulf on the Somme 

William. o 

Longsword. at Pecquigny, separated from his adherents, 
and basely murdered on the Flemish side of the river. 

William Longsword is one of those characters whom 
history has falsely honoured, and he finds a place among 
His cha- the acknowledged heroes of France, almost 

racter. among her martyrs. The fame of the Norman 

name, the partiality of the Norman historians who wrote 
for Richard his son, his tragic death, the romantic 
interest which surrounds the early life of his devoted son, 
his own attractive character, all have contributed to throw 
an unreal glamour round his name. In him we find the 
weaknesses and the strength of his double nationality. 
His winning, gracious manners, his ready wit and ver- 
satility, he gained from his gentle mother Popa : his 
bright features, his bravery, his rough sense of justice, 
liis personal vigour, were the gifts of his father Rollo ; 



942. Richard the Fearless. 49 

and these earned him the love of his fellow-men. 
But the fair traits were shaded by darker tints. Fickle- 
ness and faithlessness, these were the faults of his 
mother's race and of his age, and these he shared with 
the rest of his contemporaries. A creature of impulse, 
his justice seems to have Had no firmer basis than that of 
natural inclination. Often seriously wishing to abandon 
his ducal throne for the seclusion of the cloister, he yet 
showed scanty regard for the things of Holy Church, and 
was niggardly in his endowments. The monasteries were 
the one redeeming element in those distracted times, 
and these, with one exception, he carelessly neglected. 
The paganism of his father seems in him hardly to have 
been eradicated, and, following his impulse and not his 
conscience, he was led by circumstances from one shift 
to another to the fatal meeting on the banks of the 
Somme. Had he pursued one consistent policy and 
remained true to his word, he would have been at least 
respected, if not loved, and the wicked coalition against 
his life might never have been formed. As it was^ he 
was snatched away in the midst of a changeable, aimless 
life ; and the existence of his race and name in France 
was endangered by the long rule of a minor. 



CHAPTER V. 

THE CAPETIAN REVOLUTION. 

Richard in our days would have been called a 
bastard, and as such he was branded even then by his 
enemies. He was son, not of Leutgarda of 

■XT J • 1 /- T- T^ Richard the 

Vermandois, but of Esprota, a Breton woman Fearless. 
of unknown lineage, whom William had pre- ^^^ ^^"^' 
viously married in Danish fashion and put away for the 
stately sister of Herbert of Vermandois. 

M. H. E 



50 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

These Danish marriages form a remarkable feature 
in Norman history. Of the five generations of Norman 
dukes, from Rollo to William the Bastard, or the Con- 
queror, the children of Richard the Good alone were born 
of a marriage sanctioned by the Church, and legal in 
our sense of the word. Loose as the marriage 

Custom of . . ,, , . , . _ 

Danish tie universally was at this date m Europe, we 

marriage. must seck for another explanation of this 
custom of the Normans, which found some analogy in 
Danish England. The Scandinavians seem to have 
been once a polygamous people, and perhaps this was a 
remnant of the ancient state of society. The position of 
a woman married by Danish fashion seems to have been 
that of a legally recognised concubine, who could not 
leave her husband at her will, and was recognised as his 
wife until he chose to sever the connexion and seek 
another wife. In that case the tie was dissolved, and the 
children were not necessarily looked upon as the legal 
heirs of their father. The Church would naturally defend 
this view and assert the superiority of the wife married 
according to her rites, or, as in the case of Richard the 
Fearless himself, enforce the subsequent celebration of 
religious rites between the husband and his concubine. 
A custom of this sort is found among the Scandinavian 
people of a later date, and it may have some resemblance 
to the custom of hand-fasting in the north of England, 
by which the parties bind themselves as man and wife 
for a year, at the end of which the connexion may be 
severed or finally completed at will. The so-called 
illegitimacy of Richard would not, perhaps, mar his 
claim to the dukedom in Norman or in Frankish eyes, 
especially since Leutgarda bore no children to his father. 
Still, the ambiguous position was an element of difficulty. 
There were enemies enough who gladly seized the 
opportunity of disputing Richard's inheritance; and 



942. Richard the Fearless. 5 1 

Leutgarda, who had married Theobald of Blois, an 
enemy of his father, and was by some accused 
of having assisted in the murder, pursued her rivals and 
step-son all her life with the traditional hostihty enemies. 
of a step-mother. But greater dangers surrounded the 
young duke. His father's death was followed by a renewed 
Danish invasion and settlement The old Renewed 
feud between the Norman and Danish party, l^^pi^h m- 

^ •" VASion and 

which had broken out in his father's time, revolt. 
and, though crushed, had been kept alive by his change- 
able policy, was revived. The Danish party welcomed 
the settlers. Hugh of Paris and Lewis jealously watched 
their opportunity. The latter, indeed, had not apparently 
any hand in the shameful murder of Duke William, but 
the Norman power had too often endangered his throne 
for him to miss the chance of humbling it for ever ; and 
Hugh had particular reasons for joining the same 
cause. 

A few months after William's death, the sister of 
Otho had borne Hugh a son, Hugh Capet, the future king 
of France. The old king-maker had already seen his 
father Robert, and his brother-in-law Rudolf of Burgundy, 
elected kings of France. He had been the guardian of 
Lewis, and, although he himself had wisely refrained 
from aspiring to the precarious title, he now began 
definitely to scheme that he might be the father of a 
king. 

Such were the threatening dangers which surrounded 
the young boy, and it was the successful struggle against 
them all which lends such romantic interest to his earlier 
years. The chief hope for his success, nay, for the pre- 
servation of his race, lay in two circumstances : the loyal 
fidelity of his father's friends, Bernard the onlyhope 
Dane, Ivo de Belesme, and Osmund de Cent- of Richard, 
villes ; and the certainty that the kingly and ducal 



5 2 TJie Normans in Europe. a. d. 

interests of Lewis and Hugh would soon diverge and 
break up the coalition. For the present, however, they 
^^ , , were firm friends. Hugh was confirmed 

Hugh and . -, ■ ■, ■, -, ,--r-. i ^ ^ r 

Lewis m his dukedom of Burgundy, and the state ot 

friends. Normandy offered them a legitimate opportu- 

nity for interference. There, the heathen party, recruited 
by the renewed Danish settlement, had rapidly increased, 
and the young duke was either persuaded or forced to 
abjure his Christian religion. Thus the Christian and 
French parties were driven to appeal to Lewis and Hugh. 
The wish of some of the Danish party apparently was to 
unite Normandy with the kingdom of Denmark ; but even 
short of this, the interference of Lewis and Hugh mightwell 
be justified. Rollo had sworn to become a Christian and a 
Frenchman, his grandson hadwilhngly or unwillingly bro- 
ken that compact, a party in the duchy had turned against 
their duke and appealed to them for aid ; feudal ideas 
were fast developing, and Lewis might well claim the 
Normandy Wardship over the fief during the minority of 
invaded and his vassal. Accordingly the duchy was in- 
by^Hugh vaded, the Danish party overthrown, Rouen 
and Lewis. seized, and Lewis gained possession of the 
young duke's person, while Hugh secured Evreux. United 
Richard by this common robbery, Lewis and Hugh 

falls into the seemed firmer friends than ever ; and Lewis, 

hands of 

Lewis. elated by the prospect of acquiring the whole 

of Normandy, granted in full sovereignty to Hugh the 
duchy of Burgundy, which henceforth became a de- 
pendency of the lord at Paris. But here all concord 
ended. Lewis wished to hold all Normandy; 
tween Lewis Hugh wished to have his share. From the 
and Hugh. ^^^^ ^^^^ ^le had been forming a party 
among the Normans, and now he turned against his 
ally. Meanwhile Lewis permanently occupied Rouen, 
and the young Richard, transferred to the town of 



942-945 Richai'd the Fearless. 5 3 

Laon, remained to all intents a prisoner, where, if we 
may believe the Norman authorities he was ^. , , 

-' ^ Richard a 

treated with cruel harshness. The French prisoner at 
party among the Normans, who had under the 
first impulse of terror applied to Lewis, but had no desire 
to become subjects of the Karoling king, felt their old 
spirit of independence stirred up by this base conduct. 
Hugh, not improbably, worked upon their discontent, and 
they rapidly slipped away from Lewis. Richard, aided 
by his trusty companion, Osmund, escaped 
from Laon, hidden in a truss of hay ; and the capes from 
standard of revolt was raised. At this mo- NOTmandy 
ment a new ally most opportunely was found, rebels 
Denmark, since the days of Gorm the Old a Lewis, 
single powerful kingdom, was at this date in ^^s- 

the hands of his son, Harald Blaatand (Blue-tooth), the 
grandfather of our Canute. In Normandy's Richard as- 
greatest peril this honest man appeared on jjaraid^ 
her coast, rallied the Normans round his Blaatand. 
standard, and meeting Lewis on the Dives utterly routed 
him. Lewis, made prisoner in personal combat with the 
hardy Danish king, escaped in the turmoil which suc- 
ceeded only to fall into the hands of the 
enemies stirred up against him by Hugh. Battle of 

the Dives 

Harald now passed through the land, con- Lewis made 
firming the authority of the young Duke P"soner. 
Richard and restoring the old Norman customs, and then, 
his mission over, returned to his northern home. Such 
singular disinterestedness on the part of a heathen king, 
if we can believe the tale, puts to shame the unfathomed 
faithlessness of all those so-called Christian princes with 
whom we have had to deal. A strange mediator between 
the Normans and Lewis was found in the treacherous 
Hugh who then became his gaoler. Deaf to the remon- 
strances of Edmund of England, Hugh only yielded to 



54 The Nor^nans in Europe. a.d. 

the threats of Otho on condition that Laon should be 
Is forced to Ceded to him; and Lewis, the victim of his 
to^Hudi "^ own greed, regained his freedom at the price of 
of Paris. his own imperial city. Hugh and the other 

princes renewed their homage ; but the Normans, exaspe- 
^ . , , rated by the treatment they had undergrone, 

Richard ./,.,,,. . \ , / 

refuses revived their old clanns to mdependence, and, 

homage. if we may believe the partial evidence of their 

chroniclers, repudiated for ever the demands of the 
Frankish king. Still, Normandy could not hope to stand 
Close al- alone ; an alliance was necessary, and it was 
Hancebe- sought at Paris. Self-interest alone could 
and Nor- keep Hugh true ; but at the time this so clearly 
mandy. pointed to alliance with Normandy, that the 

Normans were justified in looking to him for aid. After 
all, Paris was the natural ally of the Normans. Hitherto, 
adhering to the oath of Rollo, they had paid a personal 
allegiance to the Karoling line ; but now, becoming 
French, they of necessity turned to Paris. We have 
seen in the reign of William Longsword the question 
raised, whether they were to be Frenchmen or Scandina- 
vians. This had been decided in favour of the former, 
Richard is "^"^^^ therefore, French Paris, and not Frank 
betrothed Laon, must in future be their ally. The 
daughter 'of alliance assumed the form usual at that time. 
ScSmes^hfs feudal ideas were rapidly growing, and 
vassal. Richard, following the custom of the day, 

commended himself to Hugh and became 
his man; while Hugh, anxious to secure the friendship 
of the Normans for his son, betrothed his young daughter 
Emma to the Norman Richard. 

Thus began the vassalage of the Duke of Normandy 
to the Duke at Paris, which, though sometimes denied by 
the independent Normans, was a real one, and deeply 
affected their future history. 



946. R ichard the Fearless. 5 5 

We have now arrived at a point where, amid the 
hopeless confusion of the petty struggles, by which the 
kingdom had been so long distracted, two principles arise, 
and become definite and distinct. 

Since the days of Charles the Simple the chief ques- 
tion at issue had been the succession to the throne of the 
West Franks, and the quarrels and treaties p^ns be- 
between Laon and Paris the true thread of comes the 

1 1- T-, -n 1 1 • r chief oppo- 

these discontents. But till now the claim 01 nent of 
Paris to be the sole rival of the Karoling ■^^°"- 
line had been disputed by other princes. Burgundy 
had already given a king, and Vermandois, proud of 
a descent from Charles the Great, had entered the 
lists as a competitor. Now Burgundy was annexed to 
ducal Paris ; Vermandois, since the death of Herbert, 
according to some accounts by his own hand (943), had 
been divided amongst his sons, while a small portion 
had gone to extend the ever-growing dominions of Hugh. 
Arnulf, since the treacherous murder of Duke William, 
seems to have lost influence and power. Normandy, 
long the chief supporter of the Karoling line, and hitherto 
the constant enemy of Paris, had at last commended 
itself to Hugh, and concluded a strict alliance. From 
all these causes the power of Hugh became supreme ; 
no one arose to dispute his claim of being the leader of 
the opposition to Lewis and his family. The intricate 
plot is working out, the catastrophe is at hand, and the 
chief actors in that catastrophe are clearly seen. 

The second principle follows from the first. We have 
seen that it originally was the two chief dukes of the 
West Franks who were allied against their Alliance of 
king. The quarrel then was one of the ducal J^ain^Se 
provincial element against the royal-imperial, two kings. 
Now that kingly interests were definitely at stake, it 
was only natural that Lewis should turn to his neigh- 



l6 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

bour Otho. The king of Germany had himself to 
Reason for Struggle against the jealousy of the rival pro- 
Otlwand^ vinces, of which many only surlily acquiesced 
Lewis'. in the establishment of the Saxon line upon 

the throne, and this alone would lead him to favour the 
appeal of Lewis. But there was another reason. Otho 
had probably already conceived the idea of claiming the 
empire for himself, and reviving in his own person the 
position of Charles the Great ; and Lewis, too glad to 
get valuable aid at any price, acquiesced. 

Thus, the quarrel which ensued was between two 
kings on one side and two dukes on the other, the 
provincial against the imperial element ; and it was the 
severing of one of these alliances which really decided 
the question. As long as the German king supported 
Lewis the influence of Normandy was counterbalanced; 
but when that policy was temporarily abandoned by Otho, 
the fall of the house of Laon and the rise of Capetian 
France was the necessary and inevitable consequence. 
It is fortunate that we are able thus to clear our way, 
and that the main questions at issue stand out sharply, 
because of the details it is extremely hard to feel secure. 
The French and German accounts are meagre in the 
extreme, while the Norman overwhelm us with details 
which are probably semi-mythical. We shall, therefore, 
only briefly notice the chief points of interest. 

Otho, indignant at the terms imposed upon Lewis on 
regaining his freedom, joined him, and their united forces 
-y^^j Qf invaded the territories of Hugh and Richard. 

kings Repulsed from Laon, Paris, and Rouen, they 

against ' ^ . j j 

dukes. only succeeded in taking Rheims, from which 

94 -953- they expelled Hugh's nominee, the once boy- 
bishop, Laon only fell in 949, and then by stratagem. 
The Norman chronicler Dudo and the later romancers 
are loud in their rejoicings over the humiliation of the 



946-954- Richard the Fearless. 57 

kings; but though their efforts were crowned by no signal 
success, the cause of Lewis seems to have steadily ad- 
vanced. The Church, which was again beginning to 
make its voice heard, declared for the kings, and Hugh 
was excommunicated by the Pope. The princes of 
Aquitaine were definitely gained over, and by 953 Hugh 
had made full submission. Such was the Death of 
position of Lewis when he was snatched away Lewis, 954. 
by an untimely death at the age of thirty-three. 

It has been usual to speak of the last representatives 
of the Karoling line as poor weakly kings, idly dreaming 
away their lives on the throne, or patiently 
submitting to become the creatures and the of later 
prisoners of their vassals ; and the contrast ^^^oliiigs. 
between the strength of Charles and the incapacity of his 
successors has been used to point the moral of many 
a tale. This idea, no doubt, owes its origin to the 
persistency of their bad fortune, but is entirely untrue 
to fact. They were unsuccessful ; they were, in com- 
mon with the rest of their contemporaries, wanting in 
political morality, which often injured their cause, but 
they were by no means deficient in energy or natural 
ability. Had they been so, the line would have ended 
long before. The lives of Charles the Simple and of 
Lewis Avere marked by singular activity : they displayed 
great power of bearing up against reverses, and no mean 
sagacity in taking advantage of the few opportunities 
which presented themselves. But their lot w'as cast in 
desperate times. They were surrounded by Their diffi- 
a crowd of ambitious, turbulent, and utterly cuities. 
fickle feudatories, who, while they agreed in nothing else, 
were at one in their desire to set at naught the authority 
of their king, and whose faithless alliances were, perhaps, 
more dangerous than open hostility. Their reigns were 
troubled by constant incursions of the Northmen and 



58 The Normans in E?irope. a.d. 

Hungarians. The people were too much down-trodden to 
make their influence felt as they did at a later date, and 
the dynasty of Charles the Great had not been based 
upon the wants and wishes of the separate nationalities. 

Truer is it to say, that the work would have been too 
much for another Charles the Great, than that his de- 
scendants were the victims of their own incapacity. 

On the death of Lewis the destinies of Gaul were again 

in the hands of Hugh, although Otho claimed a real but 

ill-defined supremacy. To the influence of these 

Lothaire , •^ -i ^ • ^ 

chosen king two men we may ascribe the election of 
under Lothaire. Otho had supported Lewis : it was 

p3.Lrori3,^G AX 

of Otho and natural he should support his son." As for 
ug . 954- Hugh, a king-maker he had lived and a king- 
maker he wished to die ; and Lothaire, at the age of thir- 
teen, like his father before him, ascended the throne under 
the protection of this busy intriguing prince. Hugh, once 
more the guardian of his king, hiastened to turn the posi- 
tion to his own advantage. Gaining from Lothaire a 
grant of the duchy of Aquitaine, he embroiled the king in 
a war with the princes of that country, but their combined 
Hugh dies forces were checked before Poictiers. The war 
956- was ended, and shortly after, Hugh's successful, 

restless, intriguing life was brought to a close. 

Unwilling or unable to assume the crown himself, he 
had paved the way for his son, and this in two ways. 
The constant intrigues of his earlier life had 
his life's tended to weaken the power of the royal line, 

'^°'"^- and the final alliance made with Normandy 

eventually served to place his son upon the throne. 

Left a minor at the age of thirteen, Hugh Capet fell by 
the will of his father under the guardianship of Richard the 
Hugh Capet Norman duke, and the alliance was cemented 
Fadrunder ^^ 9^° ^y ^^^ Consummation of the marriage 
guardian- between Emma and Richard, who renewed 



956-987- Richard the Feajdess. 59 

his homage to his ward. The relations between 
Paris and Laon remained the same, Hugh Richard the 
doing homage to young Lothaire. Thus the Fearless, 
destinies of Laon and Paris were in the hands of two boys 
of ahnost equalages,theKaroHngleaningmoreandmore on 
the staff of Germany, and the Frenchman on that of Nor- 
mandy. So things remained, with the excep- 

962 

tion of one short war between Lothaire and Death of 
Richard, until the death of Otho I. "^'^^ ^^ 973- 

By that event the last hope for the Karoling line was 
extinguished. Lothaire foolishly quarrelled with his suc- 
cessor, Otho II., about the possession of ^^j. 
Lotharingia, and the war which ensued was between 
only ended by the death of the two rivals and Otho 
within three years of each other. Thus by ^^■' ^^S- 
the imprudence of Lothaire, the powerful German house 
was alienated at the moment when its aid ^r,. , 

900 to 907. 

was most needed. Lewis V. 

Once more the Karoling line was chosen, king, but 
and Lewis, the son of Lothaire, quietly sue- ^^^^ ^^7- 
ceeded under the protection of Duke Hugh. The one act 
of his reign was to alienate the powerful Archbishop of 
Rheims, Adalbero, whose interests were thus transferred 
to Paris. 

At Lewis's death the crown was again referred to 
the will of the princes. The only two possible competitors 
were Charles of Lorraine, the uncle of the late 
king, and Hugh Capet. Of these, Charles forThe 
had made himself unpopular by accepting '^^r°'^e- 
part of Lotharingia as a fief of the empire, and had, in 
some sort, been already passed over when not elected to 
share the kingdom with Lothaire, according to the usual 
custom. Now that Lotharingia was definitely a fief of the 
Empire, Laon was evidently not the place for the capital 
of a French kingdom, nor the German-speaking Charles 



6o The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

the person to be king over a French-speaking people. 
Indeed, when we review the past we are tempted to wonder 
that the Karohng hne had not long ere this been aban- 
doned, not that it was abandoned now. 

But if not the Karoling line, who had better claims 
than Hugh ? His family had already given two kings to 
Gaul (Eudes. 887-893 ; Robert, 922-923), his 
Hugh father's life had been one long preparation for 

Capet. 987. ^^ change, and had he willed, probably it 
would have occurred before. Now at least there could be 
no doubt. Hugh Capet could depend upon the suffrages 
of Burgundy which was in the hands of his brother 
Eudes, of the metropolitan Archbishop of Rheims, lately 
estranged from Lewis, and, above all, of Richard the 
Norman duke, who had private as well as public wrongs 
to avenge. There were some, indeed, who favoured 
Charles, but of these Aquitaine was too little connected 
with France to make its influence felt, and Vermandois 
was no longer powerful. The only influential supporters 
of Charles were the Archbishop of Sens and Baldwin of 
Flanders ; when, therefore, the Archbishop of Rheims, as- 
serting the elective character of the crown, put the question 
to the vote, the election of Hugh Capet was carried by 
WargSy-Sg. acclamatiou. The party of Charles, not strong 
Charles dies e^Qugh to gain liis election, took up arms in 

m prison, & to ? r 

1001. his behalf. Charles displayed the activity 

common to his race, and for two years carried on the 
struggle with considerable success, but fortune had de- 
clared against the Karolings, and now overwhelmed their 
last representative. Betrayed by the treachery of the 
Bishop of Laon, whose most sacred promise he had 
trusted, he and his city were handed over to Hugh. Laon 
ceased for ever to be a capital, and Charles remained a 
prisoner till his death in looi. 

The revolution which was thus consummated was one 



987. 



Richard tJie Fearless. 6i 



of the utmost importance to France and to Europe. Its 
importance, however, did not lie in the elec- 

. - ^^ , _, 1-1 r Importance 

tion of Hugh Capet, but m the permanence of ofthisrevo- 
his dynasty. The KaroHngs had been over- '"'^lon. 
thrown, and the third dynasty established by a complica- 
tion of fraud, treachery, and misfortune, not by conscious; 
adherence to any acknowledged principle. The chief 
actors were no doubt entirely ignorant of the important 
part they were playing in the history of their country. 
As far as they were concerned, it was little more than one 
phase of the petty struggles which had been for years 
distracting Gaul. Their motives, as before, were utterly 
selfish and temporary. Hugh Capet was king, as Odo 
his great-uncle and Robert his grandfather had been 
before him, but no one could tell whether his power would 
be more lasting than theirs ; certainly no one saw the 
hidden forces at work which were to establish his family 
firmly upon the throne for full 800 years. The princes, 
therefore, were unconscious agents in this eventful 
change ; for its consummation we must look to other' 
causes. 

In the accession, or rather in the permanence, of the 
Capetian dynasty, we see the rebound from the principles 
upon which Charles the Great had founded causes of 
his empire. A reaction had long been opera- Hugh's 
ting to break up that empire ; but it is not till Reaction" 
now that its effect is thoroughly worked out ff^mst 

° ■' ideas upon 

as far as France is concerned. The empire which the 
had been founded upon a false attempt at charks^the 
unity, against which Nature herself cried out, Great had 
and which had no real social or internal basis, founded. 
It was a violation of all geographical bound- ness^/the 
aries — not to be lightly violated, at least in early Empire, 
times. The people he thus tried to unite had absolutely 
no common basis of nationality, no common interests, or 



02 TJlc Normans in Enropt. a.d. 

language, or social customs, none of the bonds necessary 
to form a united state. It was an empire founded upon 
conquest, not upon the wishes of the people ; an attempt 
to force a Teutonic government on Romanised Gaul ; 
hence it was a purely personal rule. Nor was this all. 
The ideas to which it looked for strength were too complex 
for an early state of society. Charles had attempted to 
revive the old imperial ideas of Rome by the infusi(Hi ot 
younger Teutonic ones. The Emperor of Rome, in virtue 
of being head of the senate, had been looked upon as the 
representative of the people in all things. He was high- 
priest as well as emperor. When Christianity was made the 
state religion by Constantinc this position of high-priest 
was continued under a Christian form. Charles added 
to this the elective character of the German king, 
and the close connexion with the Church. Based on such 
principles as these the Empire was ill-suited to the temper 
of the times, and as soon as Charles's master hand was 
removed, the disrupti\e forces set to work and broke it 
up. The attempt to form a Christian empire was re- 
produced on a more modest but firmer basis by the Holy 
Roman Empire of Otho I. (962). In Gaul the same 
agencies began to move, and after a long struggle tri- 
umphed in the accession of Hugh Capet. 

The natural limits of modern France are the 
basins of the Rhone, the Somme, the Seine, the Loire, 
and the Garonne, which form a network over the whole 
of France, now completed by her system of canals. The 
natural capital must be found somewhere in the centre, 
Orleans, or Lyons, or Rouen might dispute the claim 
with Paris, but not Laon, lying as it did at the eastern 
extremity, on no large navigable river, close to the Ger- 
man frontier. The fictitious unity achieved by Charles 
was gradually replaced by a more real though less 
ambitious one, a unity defined ly natural boundaries 



987. Richard the Fearless. 6^) 

and knit together by the ties of common interest and 
of a common language. The Teutonic element had 
never really leavened Gaul. Its permanent influence is 
bounded by an imaginary line drawn from Cherbourg to 
Marseilles ; west of that, fully half of France, it did not 
reach at all, and even east of it the Romance element 
soon cast off the Teutonic superstructure, broke off all 
connexion with Germany, and looked for a national 
dynasty to represent its national features. Of all the ideas 
upon which the Empire of Charles was based, one alone, 
the elective character of its king, it retained, and that a 
common one to European nations. Feudalism arose to 
complete the idea of P>ench royalty and to fix it. The 
dominion of Charles was a personal one. Against this, 
in France as elsewhere, was formed the idea of territorial 
dominion. Earlier kings had been kings of the East and 
West Franks, Hugh Capet was the first king of France. 
Thus, in every way, the dominion of the Capets was the 
negation of the principle upon which the Empire had been 
based ; and this at once explains their weakness and 
their strength. Their power was by no means a personal 
one. They owed their rise to the centrifugal tendencies 
before which the Empire had fallen. At their accession 
royalty was at its lowest ebb. Their own domains were 
no doubt more extensive than those of the later Karolings. 
They consisted of Picardy, part of Champagne, E:xtent of 
the city and county of Paris, Orleans and ^^ Hu'h"^ 
Chartres ; — ^a narrow strip running north and Capet, 
south, equally divided by the river Seine. But their 
power over the rest of France was probably less. South of 
the Loire their existence was hardly recognised, and north 
of it Lotharingia had been finally given up to Germany. 
The connexion with Flanders was gradually weakened. 
The Duke of Normandy holding the very keys of their 
dominions and shutting them out completely from the 



64 The Normans in Ettrope. a.d. 

sea-board threatened to overshadow them, while their 
power was further circumscribed by some hundred sove- 
reign states, absolute within their own dominions and 
owing a nominal allegiance to their over-lord at Paris, 
which was often exchanged for an attitude of open 
defiance. 

Whatever view we take of the character of the earlier 
Capetian kings — whether with some we consider them as 
priest-ridden weaklings, or with others declare them to be 
men of considerable ability and activity — we cannot but 
wonder how they retained the throne. They had lost the 
presumptive title of long possession, so valuable in earlier 
times. Their accession was certainly accompanied by 
increased power among the feudatories, with whom they 
were long engaged in deadly strife. Unconscious of the 
subtle forces which were supporting them, their lives were 
spent in petty struggles, until, with Lewis VI,, 

II08-II37. X. I ^ \ 1 A .U . TT 

the monarchy awoke to rind that France 
had grown meanwhile, and firmly fixed them on the 
throne. 

We have dwelt upon the important struggle which 
Importance ended in the final triumph of Paris because 
cfthisrevo- the Norman dukes had been the primary 

lution to . , . - 

Norman agcnts m the revolution, and because future 
history. Norman history is deeply influenced by it. 

Since the days of Rollo, Norman history had formed an un- 
broken thread in the tissue of the history of France. As 
long as the Norman dukes remained true to the Karolings 
they were safe ; but when Richard finally sided with Hugh 
of Paris, their death-knell was sounded, and it was only 
a question of time as to the exact moment when the event 
should be consummated. Thus it was the Normans who 
had made Gaul France, and Paris owes her position as 
capital of modern France above all to their agency. The 
effect on Normandy, on the other hand, is fully as great. 



987. Richard the Fearless. 65 

Till now the Normans had been hardly accepted as 
Christian brethren by their neighbours ; they were hated 
while they were feared, and branded with the name of 
pirates. Henceforth they gain a recognised and impor- 
tant position as Frenchmen. In Normandy the best 
French qualities appear : the vivacity, the impulsiveness, 
the cleverness of the Romanised Celt seem to have gained 
strength from the courage, the high spirit of indepen- 
dence, the perseverance, the chivalry of the Scandinavian. 
Nowhere else is the Scandinavian influence so great, no- 
where else is it so permanent. Elsewhere they become 
rapidly lost amid the surrounding nationality, and lose 
their predominance ; in Normandy the union of the 
Scandinavian nobles with the French lower classes pro- 
duces a famous and peculiar type of men, the best of the 
French — the conquerors and wise kings of Sicily, the 
powerful conquerors and organisers of England, the 
flower of chivalry and the heroes of the Crusades. Here 
the langue cfoil assumes its greatest polish, here rise 
the first of North-French poets, here the finest of the early 
French cathedrals are built. 

Lastly, the relations between Normandy and Paris, 
inaugurated by the revolution which we have been con- 
sidering, deeply affected the future history of Normandy 
as well as that of France. Richard 11. had commended 
himself to Hugh, the great Duke of Paris. That duchy 
had now grown into a kingdom. The vassalage con- 
tinued, but it was due rather to Hugh Capet as duke 
than as king of France ; and while the Capetian kings in 
later days ill requited the assistance they had received 
from their Norman vassals, the Normans were ever ready 
to claim their independence and reduce their vassalage to 
the narrowest limits. 

With this Capetian revolution, in which Richard had 
borne so promment a part, his public life ended, and the 

M. H. F 



66 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

remaining years of his eventful reign were spent in 
quiet at Rouen, Nothing disturbed the internal peace 

of the duchy if we except a short war with 
England. England. This is said to have been caused 
9^^' by the shelter offered by Richard to the 

Danes, who, under Swegen, king of Denmark, and son 
of Harald Blaatand, were again beginning to trouble 
England and entering on that political conquest which 
culminated in the establishment of Canute upon the 
English throne. The war was soon put an end to through 
the mediation of the Pope, and is important only as 
forming the first instance in which the Norman dukes 
were brought into direct connexion with the English kings. 
Richard's marriage with Emma had been unfruitful, 
and his children by Guenora, a woman of unknown 

lineage, were looked upon as illegitimate by 
Sards'* the Church, since he had been married to 
SoSgto ^^^ ^^^y ^^^^^ ^^^ Danish fashion. He now 
Christian married her according to Christian rites, and, 

rites, . . 

by the doctrine of the Church, his children 
became legitimatised. Of these Richard succeeded him, 
and his two daughters subsequently married Ethelred 
the Unready of England and Geoffrey of Brittany. 
Thus, having settled the question of the succession, 
Richard's work was done. His reign had been a long 
and troubled one. Succeeding at the age of ten to his 
Effect of his dukedom suddenly bereaved of its master 
reign. ^y ^ violent death, and threatened by foes 

and dangers, he had successfully weathered the crisis, 
established the Norman family on the soil, and taken 
the, leading part in the change of dynasty which was 
so deeply to colour the future history of his race. He 
His death. had outlived all his reigning contemporaries 
99^- and seen a new generation arise, and yet when 

his long reign of fifty-three years was closed he was only 



996. Richard the Fearless. 6y 

sixty-three. His character is marked by all his father's 
best qualities without his weaknesses. Judged His charac- 
by the standard of to-day the morality of *^^''- 
his private life would not stand the test, but no act of 
public dishonesty or faithlessness is recorded against 
him, and his great abilities, softened by urbanity and 
courtesy, gained him the love and esteem of his people. 
Within the duchy his reign is one of quiet seed-time and 
growth. Norman nobility began to arise ; there are few 
noble houses whose lineage we can trace earlier than 
his reign ; the feudalising process was advancing and 
■acquiring definite form. Nor were there wanting signs 
of nascent prosperity among the middle classes. The 
Normans took readily to trade, and gladly welcomed the 
industrious Fleming, whose fame as a manufacturer was 
already known. The position of the burghers was 
apparently a solid one. Annual mercantile fairs existed, 
andFalaise was already noted for its tanneries and woollen 
manufactures. The latter part of Richard's reign was 
spent in organising his dukedom, issuing the first coinage 
of the Norman mint, and in restoring Fecamp and other 
monastic establishments which had been suffered to fall 
into decay during the troubled times which had preceded. 
In every way the Normandy of later times was arising, 
and, if Rollo is to be considered the first founder of 
the power of Danish Normandy, Richard, the last of the 
Danish, the first of the French Norman dukes, is the 
second founder of the dukedom. 



6S The Normans in Europe. a.d. 



CHAPTER VI. 

RICHARD THE GOOD. 

By the death of his father, Richard the Second, the 
Good, succeeded at a somewhat early age. Scarcely- was 
T,- 1- J L he on the ducal throne when he had to meet 

Richard the 

Good. a threatening movement on the part of the 

pea^sants. peasants. It is not often in the history of that - 

997- date that we have an opportunity of judging 

of the condition of the lower classes. The scarcity of all 
written records, and the fact that the chroniclers wrote only 
for princes and their courtiers, have alike contributed to 
this. Hence, little as we know of this peasant revolt, it 
naturally arrests our attention. We have seen that in 
the days of Richard the Fearless aristocratic ideas were 
growing, and that the feudalising process — that is, the 
custom of commending oneself to an over-lord — had 
already commenced. Under his son these ideas in- 
creased. Brought up a thorough Frenchman, he had 
imbibed the aristocratic and feudal sentiments which 
were arising in France, and a later writer informs us that 
he refused to have any but gentlemen about his person, 
while the possessions carved out of the ducal domain for 
the numerous illegitimate children of the late duke in- 
creased the number of the petty lords. This, too, is the 
date of the rise of baronial castles. Europe probably 
first learnt the art of building them to protect themselves 
against the Northmen, the HiJngarians, and Saracens, 
whose intermittent ravages had been common for the 
last two centuries ; and we may be sure that the 

Normans would not be slow to follow the lead, and to 

cover the country with these defences of the strong. 

Hence aristocratic privilege increased, while the numx^ 



997. 



Richard the Good. 69 



rous grants made to the courtly adherents of the duke 
multiplied the numbers of the landlords, and brought 
them into close connexion with the peasantry. The 
peasant class in Normandy was formed chiefly of the 
old Romance population, who, at some time subsequent to 
the first settlement of the Northmen, had fallen into the 
class of ' villeins ' holding small plots of land for which 
they owed service to their superior. Elsewhere in France 
the condition of the lower classes was probably very 
wretched; they were harassed by continual war, agri- 
culture was in its infancy, and there was no skill to 
struggle against adverse seasons. The increase of pesti- 
lence and famine w^as the sad result ; forty-eight such visit- 
ations are recorded between 987 and 1057. Probably the 
condition of the peasants in Normandy was not so bad ; 
a man must have bread before he can become a poli- 
tician, and the peasants at this time seem to have had 
some ideas of self-government. To men in such a 
position the growth of aristocratic privilege, the multi- 
plication of landlords, and the advance of the theory of 
lordship, would be peculiarly galling. This was the 
probable reason for the movement, which was most likely 
joined by some of Scandinavian descent and some small 
holders irritated at the growth of aristocratic privilege. 
Retaining perhaps from Roman times some traces of 
local self-government by which the decemvirs were, 
elected in each ^ pagus ' to form a municipal council, these 
peasants began to assemble and discuss their wrongs. 
The author of the ' Roman de Rou,' writing in th^ twelfth 
century, thus sums up their complaints : ' The nobles do 
us nought but ill, and we gain no profit from our labours. 
Our days are spent in toil and fatigue, our beasts are 
seized for dues and services, our goods wasted by con- 
tinual suit's. We have no safety against our lords, and no 
oath is binding on them. Why should we not shake off 



/o The Normans in Etirope. a.d. 

all the evil ?— are we not men as they ? Dare we to do 
and dare : a good heart is all we want. Let us then 
unite, and if they should make war upon us, have we not 
thirty or forty hardy peasants ready to fight with club 
and flail to each knight? Let us only learn to resist, and 
we shall be free to cut our own firewood, to fish and 
hunt, to do our will in river, field, and wood.' En- 
couraged by these harangues, they deputed representa- 
tives to a general assembly, and made a '■ commune,' 
says the same author, to talk over their common wrongs 
and discuss the means of resistance. The writer, a clerk 
of the Royal Chancery to Henry L, would not be likely 
to paint their motives or their actions in favourable 
colours. From this, an enemy's account, we may there- 
fore fairly conclude that the movement was something 
more than a meaningless savage revolt against all order. 
We meet with no such movement' in England till the 
time of Richard I., when London was threatened by 
something of the same sort under William Fitzosbert. 
That was, however, only a municipal movement, confined 
to the city itself; and for the true counterpart of this 
we must wait till the rebellion of Wat Tyler in Richard 
the Second's reign in 1381. Like that, however, it wa.- 
doomed to failure. It was looked upon as a dangerous 
revolt against society, and was dealt with accordingly. 
Richard, getting news of it before it had gained a head, 
crushed it out with merciless cruelty, and the chroniclers 
of the day recount with brutal levity how the rebels were 
scourged ; their eyes plucked out ; their heads chopped 
ofi", and distributed as a warning amongst their neigh- 
bours. We hear no more of peasant revolts in Norman 
history, but it seems to have borne its fruit. When 
we reach the era of the written evidence, we find the 
villeinage of Normandy lighter than elsewhere, per- 



I003-I020. Richard the Good. yt 

sonal servitude did not exist, while the villein-holders 
of the Channel Islands seem from very early times to 
have enjoyed a freedom as great as that of our yeomen. 
Master of his subjects at home, the Norman duke 
rapidly increased in power abroad. This will Foreign re- 
be best appreciated by considering the foreign RichTrd Ae 
relations of the duke to the various countries Good. 
which surrounded him. With the German Otho he had 
little to do. The Normans had now become cr u. i 

Slight rela- 

Frenchmen ; and ♦^he dynastic quarrels be- tions be- 
tween Germany and France, rudely settled by n^ny and 
the accession of the Capetian dynasty, were at France. 
an end. Each country was now carrying on its work of 
consolidation until they should be again drawn into con- 
flict as the age of political contests drew on. 

France. 

Richard the Good remained true to the policy inaugu- 
rated by his father in connecting himself closely with his 
over-lord the Capetian king. This policy was with 
dictated by identity of interest. Normandy, as France, 
well as France, was surrounded by dangerous neighbours: 
the Duke of Burgundy, the Count of Anjou, and the 
Counts of Chartres and of Flanders, all of them jealous 
of the growing power of the two upstarts, the King of 
Paris and the Duke of the Normans. 

The Normans had now become thoroughly French in 
interests and ideas, and if the Dukes of Normandy 
were the chief mainstay of the king, the alliance of 
Paris was nearly as valuable to the Norman dukes. In 
fact, their destinies were to advance hand in hand until 
their relations should be reversed by the overwhelming 
power of the Norman vassal. 

Thus it is that in all the wars of Robert, who had 
now succeeded Hugh Capet, whether against Flanders or 



72 The Normans in Eicrope. a.d. 

against Burgundy, we find Richard lending valuable 
assistance, while the King of Paris acts as mediator in 
some of Richard's quarrels. 

Two of these alone are of sufficient importance to be 
noticed. 

The Burgundian Wars, 

Burgundy, destined ever to be a thorn in the side of 
France, at this time called for the interference of Robert. 
The duchy of Burgundy had been secured to 
SSt^Ro- Henry, brother of Hugh Capet. On his death 
bert in his he had left it to his stepson, Otho William, 
Wars. a Lombard, thus violating the rights of the 

1003-1015. over-lord, the King of Paris, to whom it should 
have reverted. Burgundy had been too long regarded a 
fief of the kingdom of Paris for this to be overlooked, and 
Robert, gaining material assistance from Richard, asserted 
his claim to the fief. Otho, however, was supported by 
the nobles and clergy, and an obstinate war of twelve years 
ensuedbefore Burgundy was restored to the Capetian king. 

Otho himself subsequently gained the county of 
Burgundy (Franche-Comte), part of his mother's inherit- 
ance, which, with its connected territories of Alsace, 
Lyons, Dauphin^, and Provence, henceforth definitely 
belonged to the German Empire. 

Elides II. of Blois. 

The dominions of Thibault of Blois, the old enemy of 
the Kings of Paris, were now in the hands of his grandson 
Eudes,secondof that name. Holding Chartres, 
Eudes of Champagne, and Brie, as well as Blois, he 
^'°^^' caused considerable apprehension to his over- 

lord at Paris. Not content with these extensive and 
rich domains he seized Melun, lying on the left of 
the Seine, to the south-east of Paris, and 
^°°^* important as an outpost by which his power 

could be restrained. 



I0O3-I02O. Richard the Good. 73 

Once more Robert summoned Richard, and by his 
trusty aid regained this important frontier town. Subse- 
quently, however, Richard changed his poHcy, 
and, true to the instincts of his race, which led ^°^3"i°2o. 
the Normans to detect the signs of future greatness, con- 
nected himself with the rising house of Blois. Eudes mar- 
ried his sister Maude, and a short quarrel which Alliance of 
ensued as to the possession of the County of ^'5'^?'"'^^ 

^ •' and Eudes 

Dreux, her dower, was compromised. Eudes who marries 
retained possession of this important frontier signer of 
to the south of Normandy, and the subse- Richard, 

r 1 • A -t A ^"" gams 

quent marriage of his son Stephen to Adehza, Dreux. 

the daughter of Richard, cemented still closer the alliance 

of Normandy with that house which was eventually to 

give a king to England. 

Nor was this the only important alHance made by 

Richard. With the growing power of Brittany — separated 

from Normandy only by the small stream of 

the Coesnon — he connected himself by a iia°n"cewfth 

double marriage. He himself married Judith ^nttany. 

of Brittany, sister of Geoffrey Count of Rennes, who had 

established his supremacy over the country and gained 

the title of duke, and Haduisa his sister became 

Geoffrey's wife. When Geoffrey died, his sons Alan and 

Odo fell under the guardianship of their uncle 

J -AT 1 J 1 -1 With Bur- 

ana suzerain. Alice, another daughter, married gundy and 

Renaud, Count of Burgundy ; while another, Glanders. 

Eleanor, married the powerful Baldwin ' the bearded,' of 

Flanders. 

These alliances attest the importance of the Normans 
abroad; but there. is one more to mention, with 
which first brought Normandy and England England. 
into close relation with one another, and was fraught 
with most momentous consequences to them both. 

England at this date, under the incapable rule of 



74 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

Ethelred ' the Unready ' or ' Lack-counsel/ was once more 
being threatened by the Danes. These Danish invasions 
Weakness ^^ longer tookthe same character as the former 
of England inroads. The earKer were those of people 
Ethelred II. driven out from their northern home, and in- 
Renewed vading England for the purpose of perma- 
Danish nently settling in the country. 

invasions. ^ ,, ■> • -, ,• ^-r 

But now the three kmgdoms of Norway, 
Sweden, and Denmark had become settled and organised, 
and the latter, under the powerful Swegen, was engaged 
in a political conquest of England. Ushered in by some 
piratical attacks, the Danes in the year 994 began 
definitely to threaten England. 

Disabled by the treachery of his ealdormen, his people 
overawed, as all Christendom was at that time by the 
anticipation of the millennium, his country showing. 
Difficulties ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^i^' ^^^ absence of a truly national 
of Ethelred. spirit, the difficulties of Ethelred were great, 
and he was not the man to overcome them. He first 
resorted to the pitiful and useless expedient of buying his 
enemies off, and then, free from immediate 
war with apprehension, engaged in a needless war with 
Normandy. Richard of Normandy. 

We have seen before how in 991 he had quarrelled 
with Richard the Fearless on account of the countenance 
given by him to his Danish foes, and this was probably 
Ethelred the causc of the present war. It failed, and 
makes peace then Ethelred, anxious to gain the alliance of 

and marries ' ° 

Emma, the powcrful Nomian duke, made peace with 

Richani the him and married his sister Emma. This 
Good. 1002. marriage, so far as Ethelred was concerned, 
did not serve him much. Any hopes he may have had 
of material assistance from his brother-in-law were mis- 
placed. Richard had enough to do at home, and, unless 
he had felt inclined to engage in the war as a sort of 
crusade against the Northern Danes, the affair was none 



IOI3-IOI6. Richai'd the Good. 75 

of his. Indeed, it is probable that the connexion of the 
Normans with their oldkindred was too abiding Ethelred 
to allow of this. Richard, therefore, through- i"^^" f^°™ 

' ' ° England by 

out the Danish wars preserved a strict neu- the Danes 
trality. When Ethelred was driven from his at Richanfs 
kingdom by Swegen, he offered him and his ^°"^'^' ^°^3- 
wife and children an asylum at his court, but that was 
all. In the brief but heroic struggle of Edmund Canute 
Ironside, the son of Ethelred by a former conquers 

^ •' England, 

marriage, he took no part ; and when at last and marries 
Canute, the son of Swegen, established his Ethelred, 
kingdom in England, he continued on friendly ^°^^- 
terms with him, and allowed Emma, the widow of the 
unfortunate Ethelred, to marry the usurper of his throne. 
Nevertheless this marriage was of the greatest im- 
portance to England. With it began the connexion of 
England and Normandy, which eventually led importance 
to the Norman Conquest. The sons of Emma, rfaeToT^'^' 
the yEthelings Alfred and Edward, driven Emma. 
from their English homes, found refuge in the Norman 
court, and here Edward imbibed those Norman tastes 
which led him to introduce Normans into England when 
he regained his ancestral throne. Here he contracted 
that friendship with William the Bastard which hurried 
on the downfall of his race. 

Thus, then, on all sides the Norman power increased 
during the prosperous reign of Richard the Good. Nor 
is this more conspicuous in the political history of his 
country than in the individual energ}^' of his subjects. 
We have seen the kingdom of Denmark again showing 
signs of warlike vigour, and again disturbing 

„,,.,,. . Normandy- 

England With her mvasions. becomes the 

It is remarkable that Normandy itself at "newed^ ^ 
this date witnessed a similar movement, spirit of 
Hitherto the Normans had been fully em- 
ployed in settling themselves in Normandy and in estab- 



^6 The Normans in Etirope. a.d. 

lishing their power in France. But now that their power 
was consoHdated, their country became too small for 
their energies, perhaps unable to support the rapidly- 
increasing population, and the old spirit of adventure 
and distant conquest was aroused. In fact we have 
arrived at the period when Normandy itself became the 
starting place for those expeditions which may be well 
said to culminate in the Norman Conquest. That, 
however, was undertaken by the duke himself. Those 
which now demand our attention were the result of 
Roger de individual enterprise. Spain first attracted 
Toesny in them, and thither Roger de Toesny sailed to war 

Spain, 1018. . 1 T,«- 1 "^ ii_ • .^ ., , 

Normans in agamst the Moors, and to found, if possible, a 
^^^^' dominion for himself This, however, had no 

lasting results. Far more important is the settlement 
of the Normans at A versa in Italy. 

In the eleventh century many of the Normans seem to 
have wandered away into Italy, partly as pilgrims to visit 
the sacred shrines, but ever ready to engage in any pro- 
mising enterprise which might offer. Often called in by the 
princes of the south of Italy as mercenaries in 
at Aversa, their quarrcls with one another, they finally 
1029. were allowed to settle at Aversa by the Duke 

of Naples, and the town was built and fortified for them 
as an outpost against Capua. 

Their character is thus described by a contemporary 
historian of Italy : — ' The Normans are a cunning and 
revengeful people ; eloquence and dissimulation appear 
to be their hereditary qualities. They can stoop to flatter ; 
but unless they are curbed by the restraint of law they 
indulge the licentiousness of nature and passion, and in 
their eager search for wealth and dominion they despise 
whatever they possess and hope whatever they desire. 
Arms and horses, the luxury of dress, the exercises of 
hawking and hunting are the delight of the Normans ; 



1 029-1043. ^^^^ Norman Settlement in Italy. yy 

but on pressing occasions they can endure with incredible 
patience the inclemency of every climate, and the toil and 
abstinence of a military life.' 

The condition of the south of Italy at the time was 
this. South of Rome lay the territories of 
the independent Counts of Naples and the the south of 
republic of Amalfi. South of these again ^'^^'^• 
the Greek theme of Lombardy included all that part of 
the peninsula south of aline drawn from Mount Garganus 
to the bay of Salerno. This, recovered by 
Basil the Macedonian, still survived under ^°' 

its catapan or governor, the last remnant of the Eastern 
Empire, 

Sicily, in the hands of the Moslem, formed part of the 
kingdom of Tunis, and had long been an object of desire 
to the Eastern Emperor. In the year 1038, Normans, 
Maniaces, Catapan of Lombardy, excited by the Gr\^-^ 
the internal divisions which weakened the of Apulia, 
power of the Arabs, called in the aid of the Nor- s^cny.^"^ 
mans, and by their assistance regained at last They turn 

' •' . ° against their 

the greater portion of the island. Maniaces, allies and 
however, by his avarice and his ingratitude, alienated his 
new-found allies, and a quarrel ensuing as to the division 
of the spoil, the Normans returned two years 
afterwards to avenge the injury by attacking Apulil^ 
Apulia. The Greeks were defeated in a battle 1040-1043. 
on the plains of Cannae, and after two years a few towns 
alone remained to the Emperor of the East. 

The Normans, masters of most of Apulia, organised 
themselves into an aristocratic repubhc, consisting of 
twelve Counts, elected by popular suffrage. Amalfi was 
their capital ; here the Counts dwelt, and administered 
their affairs in military council. The president of this 
remarkable republic was William of Hauteville, son of one 
Tancred, who, with his brothers Drogo and Humphrey, 



"jZ The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

had left their home in Normandy in search of foreign 
enterprise. 

The existence of this new power raised the jealousy 
of both East and West. In 1049 a league was formed 
League of between the Emperor of the East, Henry III 
plro^'Snd Emperor of the West, and the Pope to drive 
Pope, 1049. the Normans from the soil of Italy. But the 
Emperor of the East was called off by more imminent 
dangers at home, Henry III. was engaged in German 
affairs, and Leo IX. was left single-handed to oppose the 
formidable Normans with a handful of German soldiers. 
The Normans offered terms which were contemptuously 
^ , ^ rejected, and a battle ensued at Civitella, Here 

Battle of -^ \ 

Civitella. the papal squadrons were routed by the supe- 
iken"^' ^^^^ cavalry of the Normans, and Leo IX. 

prisoner. himself was taken captive. The Normans 
consent to had all along professed themselves to be un- 
asafitfof^ willing to fight against the father of Chris- 
the Holy tendom, and, now adopting the attitude of 
e, 10^3. suppliants before their captive, they consented 
to hold Apulia as a fief of the Holy See, the Pope satis- 
fying his scruples by the consideration that their domi- 
nions were included in the supposed gift of Constantine 
to the Popes of that day. 

The Normans really received more than they gave. 
By this act of the Pope they gained a recognised position 
amongst the powers of Italy, and their future alhance 
with papal interests was dictated by sound policy. 

The office of President or first Count, after having been 
held by William, Drogo, and Humphrey in turn, passed 
Robert to Robert Guiscard (the Wise), another brother 

Guiscard. Qf ^j^jg prolific family. The fortunes of the 
famous Robert Guiscard remind us somewhat of those of 
his more powerful but scarcely more illustrious contem- 
porary, William the Bastard, the conqueror of England. 



1053- io6o. The Normaji Settlement hi Italy. 79 

Conspicuous amongst his followers for his strength and 
grace of mien, Robert had signally distinguished himself 
at the battle of Civitella. In the wiles of diplomacy he 
was the match of the clever intriguers of the South, while 
his frankness and open-heartedness earned him the 
affection of his followers. His insatiable ambition led 
him to the highest flights of enterprise, in which he 
was checked by few feelings of justice or of humanity. 
Like many of his race he was avaricious and cruel ; 
but these passions were subordinate to his lust for power, 
and his acts were those of the far-seeing but unscru- 
pulous statesman marching directly to his goal, not 
merely prompted by wantonness. To him rather than 
to his brothers is due the greatness of the Normans in 
Italy ; and while his countryman Duke William was 
adding the crown of England to his ducal possessions, 
Robert succeeded in carving out for himself a noble 
principality in the sunny South. 

During the life of his brother Humphrey, his restless 
and ambitious spirit had been a cause of anxiety, and as 
long as Humphrey lived Robert was little better than a 
state prisoner. On Humphrey's death, however, the 
tender age of his children unfitted them for 
command, and Robert, gaining the suffrages Apulia. 
of his people, was created Count of Apulia ^054-1080. 
and general of the republic. 

Not content with his position, he completed the con- 
quest of Apulia and Calabria, extorted from the hands of 
Pope Nicholas the ducal title, and henceforth 
styled himself ' By the grace of God and St. Apulia. 
Peter, Duke of Apulia, Calabria, and hereafter ^°^°' 
of Sicily.' The limits of his territory in Italy corresponded 
with those of the subsequent kingdom of Naples. Extent of 
It was composed of the Greek provinces of 1"^ territory. 
Calabria and Apulia, the Lombard principality of Salerno, 



8o The Normans in Europe, a.d. 

the republic of Amalfi, and the inland dependencies of Bene- 
ventum,that city being retained by the Roman pontiff. The 
Wealth and Hiedical and philosophical schools of Salerno, 
prosperity. long renowned in Italy, added lustre to his king- 
dom ; and the trade of Amalfi, the earliest of the Italian 
commercial cities, extending to Africa, Arabia, India, 
with affiliated colonies in Constantinople, Antioch, Jeru- 
salem, and Alexandria, enriched his ample domain. 
Excelling in the art of navigation, Amalfi is said to have 
discovered the compass. Under her Norman dukes she 
held the position of queen of Italian commerce, until 
the rise of the more famous cities of Pisa, Genoa, and 
Venice. 

The conquest of Sicily was entrusted by Robert to 
Roger, his youngest brother, the twelfth son of Tancred 
Conquest of of Hautcville, a man of like talents and 
J^^^'y ambition. 

by Roger. 

1060-1090. Undertaken under the auspices of the 

Pope, this conquest assumed the character of a crusade 
against the unbelievers. After a struggle of thirty years, 
the rich island was restored to the jurisdiction of Rome. 
Roger, with the title of Count, ruled as ' Prince of Sicily, 
hereditary and perpetual legate of the Holy See ; ' and 
Invasions of liis kingdom was organised on a feudal basis. 
Empire T\i^ succcss of his brother furnished another 

by Robert spur to the ambition of Robert Guiscard. 

1081-1085. Taking advantage of a dynastic revolution at 
Constantinople, he and his son Bohemund commenced 
a series of invasions of the Eastern Empire which only 
ended with his death. These, though unsuccessful in their 
ultimate result, were influential causes of the first crusade, 
and deeply affected the relations of East and West for 
years to come. 

Meanwhile in Sicily Roger had been succeeded by 
his son, and, in 1 1 27, this heir of the destinies of his race 



1060-85. The Norman Settlement in Italy, 81 

added the dukedom of Apulia to that of Sicily, obtained 
from Pope Anacletus the title of king, and ^^ 
finally established the Norman kingdom of Count of' 
Naples. His character is thus described by feedrtr*^" 
a contemporary chronicler. ^ He was a lover Apulia and 
of justice and most severe avenger of crime, king. 
He abhorred lying; did everything by rule, "3°- 
and never promised what he did not mean to perform. He 
never persecuted his private enemies ; and in war 
endeavoured on all occasions to gain his point without 
shedding of blood. Justice and peace were universally 
observed throughout his dominions.' 

During his reign the intercourse between England and 
Sicily was close. The government was organised on 
principles very similar to that of England ; and many an 
Englishman wandered south to find employment in Church 
and State under the Norman king of Sicily. 

Under his wise rule and that of his immediate suc- 
cessors, the south of Italy and Sicily enjoyed a transient 
gleam of prosperity and happiness. Their 
equal and tolerant government, far surpassing of their 
anything at that day in Europe, enabled the ^i"s^°™- 
Saracen, the Greek, and the Itahan to live together in 
harmony elsewhere unknown. Trade and industry 
flourished, the mani:'"acture of silk enriched Conquest of 
the inhabitants, and the kingdom of Naples Hellry^v. 
was at peace until she was crushed under the 1194-5- 
iron heel of a Teutonic conqueror. 



CHAPTER VII. 

RICHARD III. AND ROBERT THE MAGNIFICENT. 

For the sake of clearness we have carried our sketch of 
the Normans in Italy up to the middle of the twelfth 
M. H. a 



82 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

century. We must nov/ return to the Dukes of Nor- 
mandy, to trace in detail the growing connexion be- 
tween England and Normandy, which was to result in 
th-e greatest conquest -of all — the Norman conquest of 
England. 

Richard IL died without a dream of the great destiny 
awaiting his race in the south. Three y€ars before 
the settlement at Aversa, he had peacefully 
Richard II. passcd away, leaving his son Richard, the 
1026. .third of iiis name, as his successor to the 

dukedom. During his successful reign the dread of 
Normandy had increased all around. Pursuing steadily 
the policy of his father, he had confirmed the Capetian 
dynasty on ithe throne of France, strengthened his 
position by numerous alliances, and, by his quiet rufe in 
Normandy, prepared her for her next new enterprise. 

Richard III. only enjoyed his dukedom two years, 
and even these were clouded by domestic quarrels with 
Jiis brother Robert. A dispute arose betw^een 
1026-1028. the brothers as to Robert's shar^, and as 
His death. ^^ ^j^^ possession of the important castle of 
Falaise. The reconciliation was .speedily followed by 
Richard's death by poison, admini&tered, many said, by 
Robert. 

Robert, who succeeded to the dukedom under th-ese 
suspicious circumstances, has earned from the legendary 
_ , , writers the title of 'the devil.' How or why 

Robert the ... , ^ ., , , . . , "^ 

Magnificent, it IS hard to Say. Possibly the name is -due to 
1028. ^^ hatred which surrounded the early days of 

his young bastard son ; but it was scarcely deserved. If 
we except the alleged murder of his brother, of which 
there is considerable doubt, no evil deeds are brought 
against "him. 

Among contemporaries he was known as '' the Mag- 
nificent/ and this best accords with the reckless, 



J028-1031. Richard III. and Robert. 83 

extravagant liberality of his character. He bears an 
insignificant place in the history of Normandy, and to us 
is chiefly illustrious as being the father of the Conqueror. 
This son was the offspring of Duke Robert and Harlotta, 
a daughter of a tanner of Falaise, whom the duke had 
seen from the cliffs of Falaise and loved as she washed 
clothes in the neighbouring brook. The marriage ties of 
the Norman dukes had all been very loose from Rollo 
downwards. Richard II. 's children alone were born in 
lawful wedlock. The illegitimacy of William was therefore 
but a pretext ; it was the humble lineage of William's 
mother which really excited the contempt of the haughty 
Norman nobles. In his very cradle the babe was cursed by 
William Talvas de Belesme, the descendant of Revolts 
Ivo deBelesmethe trusty friend of RichardSans against 
Peur. ' Shame, shame, thrice shame,' cried cessfuiiy 
he, ' for by thee and thine shall I and mine crushed. 
be brought to loss and dishonour.' Talvas spoke for the 
nobility, and several revolts were the consequence of the 
ill-feeling. Robert, however, triumphed over them all ; 
and, secure at home, began to exercise that influence on 
the affairs of Europe which Normandy, by her position — 
geographical, social, and political — could not fail to wield. 

Brittany — at this time under Alan, Robert's cousin — 
ever eager to assert her independence, attempted to throw 
off the homage definitely claimed since the 
days of William Longsword. The attempt, duced^to ^^' 
however, failed ; Alan returned to his alle- s^^bmission. 
giance, and henceforth became the trusty supporter of 
Robert's throne. 

Elsewhere the position assumed by Robert was that 
of a protector of exiled princes and a p, , , . 
king-maker. Baldwin IV. of Flanders, driven Flanders 
forth by his rebellious son, was restored by ^^^'^°^^'^- 
the Norman duke. Soon after, Robert was called in to 



84 The Normans in Europe. a.d; 

support the claim of his suzerain, Henry of France. In 
Henry of the year 1 03 1, Robert of France, the hfe-long 
as^^sted to friend of the Norman duke, had died, leaving 
regain his ^q. crown to his eldest son Henry. His 

throne. 

1031-1033. Widow Constance, a woman of masculine 
and harsh character, disliked the retiring disposition of 
her elder son, and set up the claims of her spoilt youngest 
son Robert. The aid of Fulk of Anjou and Eudes H. of 
Blois was gained, and Henry, driven from his throne, 
was forced to throw himself on the protection of his 
vassal of Normandy. By his help the formidable league 
was overthrown, Henry was restored, and Robert his 
brother, contenting himself perforce with the duchy of 
Burgundy, became the founder of the first line of Bur- 
gundian dukes. Thus another item was added to the 
debt owed by the Kings of Paris to the Norman dukes. 
TheVexin In return Henry granted to Robert the over- 
granted to lordship over the Vexin, a piece of border land 
Magnifi- lying between France and Normandy, and 
cent. ^Q. dominions of Normandy were extended 

up to Versailles and St. Germain — in fact, up to the very 
walls of Paris. 

So far Robert had been successful in all his schemes. 
In the next he undertook he failed indeed, but it may be 
R bert ^^^^ ^^ have paved the way for the future con- 

takes up the quest by his son. The ^thelings, Alfred and 
^theiings. Edward, still remained exiles at the Norman 
1028-1035. court, neglected alike by Canute, who sat 
upon the English throne, and by their heartless mother 
Emma, who had married Canute and forgotten her 
children by the ill-fated Ethelred. 

At first Robert had continued the policy of neutrality 
Marriage of towards England inherited from his father, 
Robert ^"^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^Ti. married Estrith, sister of Canute, 
circ. 1026. Considerable obscurity surrounds the subse- 



1028-1035. Richard IIL and Robert. 85 

quent history ; but according to the most probable ac- 
count a quarrel ensued owing to the ill-treatment of 
Estrith by her husband. Robert retaliated by reviving 
the pretensions of the ^thelings, and claimed the 
cession of England to the rightful heir. Upon Canute's 
refusal, he attempted to invade England. Canute, how- 
ever, was too firmly seated on the throne to be overthrown 
by this half-hearted attempt. The expedition failed, and 
the Dane remained in undisputed possession of his 
crown. 

This ended Robert's political career. His life closed 
with a strange pilgrimage to the Holy Land, prompted 
by a fit of passionate remorse ; for what crime, pilgrimage 
we are not told. The stories of this pil- Ro1jen'^°^ 
grimage surround the name of Robert with 1035. 
the romance of a knight-errant. With ostentatious 
liberality his mules were shod with shoes of silver gilt, 
and carelessly attached by one nail alone that they might 
be lost and speak of the riches of him who had passed 
that way. Arrived at the court of Constantinople, he 
treated the Emperor with a rudeness and contempt 
which were best answered by the studied courtesy of the 
more refined monarch of the East. When he reached 
the gates of Jerusalem we are told of the contest of 
liberality between him and the Emir, Robert paying all 
the tolls of those pilgrims who waited outside the gates, 
too poor to pay their fee for entrance, which the Emir, 
not to be outdone, returned on his departure. Death of 
On his way home Robert's pilgrimage and Magnifi-^^ 
life were suddenly cut short in Bithynia, cent. 
where he died, some said, by poison. His last act well 
illustrates his extravagant, senseless generosity, the 
predominant feature of his character, and explains the 
reason of his name, ' the Magnificent.' 



86 The Normans in Europe, a.d. 

CHAPTER VIII. 

EARLIER YEARS OF WILLIAM IN NORMANDY. 

We have now to trace the fortunes of one of the most 
remarkable men the world has, perhaps, ever seen : one 
of those who seem to be born to rule mankind. Wil- 
Accesslonof ham the Conqueror is the best representa- 
Wilham the ^^^^ ^f ^^ masterful Norman character. His 

castard, 

1035. life is one long recital of extended successful 

struggles against opposing forces. As a babe he had 
His cha- clutched the straw upon the floor and refused 
racter. -j-o release his hold, and this childish act is 

typical of his future life. Born to be resisted, yet fated 
to conquer ; to excite men's jealousy and to awaken their 
life-long animosity, only to rise triumphant above them 
all, and to show to mankind the work that one man can 
do — one man of fixed principles and resolute will, who 
marks out a certain goal for himself, and will not be 
deterred, but marches steadily towards it with firm 
and ruthless step. He was a man to be feared and 
to be respected, but never to be loved ; chosen it would 
seem by Providence to fulfil its resistless destiny, to upset 
our foregone conclusions, and, while opposing and crush- 
ing popular heroes and national sympathies, to teach 
us that in the progress of nations there is something 
required beyond popularity, something beyond mere 
purity and beauty of character — namely, the mind to 
conceive and the force of will to carry out great schemes 
and to reorganise the failing institutions and political life 
of states. Born a bastard, with no title to his dukedom 
but the will of his father ; left a minor, with few friends 
and many enemies, with rival competitors at home and 
a jealous over-lord only too glad to see the power of his 
proud vassal humbled, he gradually fights his way, gains 
his dukedom, and overcomes competitors at an age when 



I035- Earlier Years of William in Normandy. 87 

most of us are still under tuto-rs and governors, extends 
his dominions far beyond the limits transmitted to him 
by his forefathers^ and then leaves his native soil to seek 
other conquests, to win another kingdom, over which 
again he has no claim but the stammering will of a weak 
king and his own irresistible energy, and, what is still 
more strange, securing the moral support of the world in 
his aggression, and winning for himself the position o-f 
an aggrieved person recovering his just and undoubted 
rights. Truly, the Normans could have no better repre- 
sentative of their extraordinary power, and the conquest 
of England is well worthy of closing, as it does, the long 
series of brilliant acquisitions gained by strength of mind 
and hand and will. 

In sketching the history of the man, three battles mark 
the three decisive epochs of ducal domination — Val-es- 
Dunes, Varaville, Hastings — and under these heads we 
will arrange his life up to the date of the Conquest 

Robert's best way to have secured the succession to 
his son would have been to have married the fair Har- 
lotta. According to the opinions of those First period 
times, this would have removed the stain on of William's 

life up to 

William's birth, and bastard he could have battle of 
been called no more. Too proud or too care- Dunes" 
less for this, Robert had satisfied himself on 1035-1047- 
leaving for his pilgrimage by extorting an oath of allegi- 
ance to his bastard son from the nobles of Normandy, 
and entrusting him to the guardianship of his cousin, Alan 
of Brittany, who forgot the quarrel of a few years back 
and fulfilled the position of regent with honour and 
fidelity. 

As long as Robert lived, the nobles submit- Rebellions 
ted in sullen silence, but the news of his death ^^^^^^ '^^ 
was the signal for general anarchy. The curse duke. 
of Talvas found echo throughout the limits of the duke- 



88 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

dom, and for twelve years the life of the young Bastard 
was in peril. 

Taking advantage of his minority and the questionable 
character of his title, the nobles threw off all allegi- 
ance, entrenched themselves within their fortified castles 
which sprang up on all sides, defied authority and 
harassed the country with their private quarrels and 
assassinations. Among the most prominent of the rebels 
we find Roger de Toesny, who had returned from his 
Spanish exploits to display the cruelties he had learnt 
in his warfare with the Moslem, Wilham Talvas de 
Belesme, the inveterate enemy of the Bastard, and the 
houses of Montgomery and of Beaumont ; the three last 
names hereafter to be well known in English history. 

Alan, attempting in vain to restrain these turbulent 
spirits, met his death by poison before the stronghold 
of the Montgomeries. The other friends of 
Murder' of the young duke fell victims by assassination, 
'^^^"" and Wilham himself with difficulty escaped 

the same fate. 

Hitherto the disturbances in Normandy had taken 
the character of isolated rebelHons of individual nobles 
struggling for their own independence, and there had 
Organised been no organised opposition to William. 
conspiracy Over these the untiring energy of William 
William, and his few hearty advisers triumphed. Now, 
I047- warned by the rapidly developing powers of 

William (he was by this time nineteen or twenty) that they 
must strike at once if they would strike at all, the nobles 
organised a wide-spread conspiracy. No claimants had 
Guy of as yet come forward to dispute the coronet 

dafmrthl with William. But now Guy, Count of Bur- 
dukedom, gundy, the son of Renaud and his wife 
Alice, sister of Richard III., claimed the duchy as his 
right by birth. His appeal was readily answered by the 



I047. Earlier Years of William in Normandy. 89 

lords of the Cotentin and the Bessin, with whom he 
promised to share his conquest. This part of Normandy 
had longest retained the memory of its Scandinavian 
origin, and had long ago rebelled against the French 
tastes and sympathies of William Longsword. But pro- 
bably it was rather the hope of independence than any 
national antagonism which now led them to rebel, since 
those districts east of the Dives which Guy proposed to 
keep for himself sided with the young duke. Around 
the standard of Guy also rallied all the factious nobles 
who had not hitherto been humbled, and thus a formid- 
able coalition arose. William, awakened from his sleep 
at Valognes by the warning cry of his court 
fool, ' Up, up, my lord duke ; open, flee, escjj^e'^f 
delay is death ! ' with difficulty escaped an Wiiham. 
attempted surprise, and flying to the strong castle of 
Falaise, his birthplace, summoned the faithful to his 
support. His authority was acknowledged by the districts 
east of the Dives, and by the towns and people generally, 
who, we are told, even in the Bessin and the Cotentin, 
cursed the rebels, and in their hearts wished well to the 
duke. 

He then appealed to his suzerain Henry. Henry had 
hitherto tacitly sided with the rebels, and Henry for 
even seized the castle of Tillieres which had ^^^ ^^^"^ ""^^ 

supports 

been built by Richard the Good to strengthen William. 
his dominions on the side of Dreux ; but now dread- 
ing lest by thus supporting the revolt he might weaken 
his own power, he for the last time sided with the duke. 
The strife which ensued took the character of a war 
between the semi- Scandinavian Bessin and Geographi- 
Cotentin of the west, and the Romance ele- f^^ ^r fP^" 

' ter 01 the 

ment of the east, a division which, often struggle. 
noticeable before in the history of Normandy, was here to 
appear for the last time. The forces met at Val-es-Dunes, 



90 The Normans in Europe. a.d, 

on a broad sloping plain some miles south-east of Caen, 
bounded to the west by the river Orne. Here a fierce 
hand-to-hand encounter of mounted knights ensued. 
No footmen are mentioned, and the Norman archers, 
subsequently so famous, do not appear. On the left was 

marshalled the royal host against the men 
Dunes, of the Cotentin. On the right the Normans 

The rebel- opposed the rebels from the Bessin. The 
lion Frenchmen, as they spurred their horses to 

the attack, raised their war-cry of ' Mont- 
joye Saint Denis ! ' — the Normans that of ' Dex aie ! ' — 
to which the rebels answered by the names of local saints. 
The struggle was long and severe. Twice was Henry 
unhorsed. William, more fortunate than his royal ally, 
here first began his successful career in arms, and struck 
down many a rebel knight. At last the rebels gave 
ground and were beaten back, then turned and fled. 
Many were driven by the hot pursuit of their foes into the 
river Orne. Here they were either drowned, or slain as 
they attempted to cross ; and the mills, we are told, were 
choked by the bodies that floated down the stream. The 
results of this crushing defeat were decisive. Guy soon 
after came to terms, and retired to Burgundy. The 
other nobles submitted, their castles were everywhere 
destroyed, and William, after a struggle of twelve years, 
found himself at last master of Normandy. His success 
had been entirely due to his energy and masterly ability, 
and his triumph was marked by singular leniency. 

But if the conduct of William after Val-es-Dunes shows 

that he was no man of blood, but spared when 
cruel treat- he thought it could safcly be done, the other 
mentofthe traits of his character — his extreme severity, 

men oi _ •' ' 

Aiengon, his impatience of insult, his revengeful spirit 
I049- — g^j.g cigaj-iy pourtrayed in his treatment of 

the rebels of Alengon. 



1049- Earlier Years of William in Normandy. 91 

The men of Alen^on, stirred by William Talvas de 
Belesme, William's old enemy, in whose lordship they lay, 
admitted Geoffrey of Anjou into their town, and rebelled 
against the duke. On his approach they spread out skins 
over the walls and beat them, shouting, '■ Hides for the tan- 
ner ! plenty of work for the tanner ! ' in contemptuous allu- 
sion to his mother's lineage. William, angered by the gross 
insult, swore by ' the splendour of God ' that he would deal 
with the mockers as with a tree whose branches are cut 
off with a pollarding axe ; and terribly he kept his word. 
The town soon after fell, and William ordered thirty-two 
of the citizens to be brought before him. By his orders, 
their hands and feet were chopped off, and the dismem- 
bered limbs thrown over the castle walls as earnests of 
his vengeance. The garrison, pitifully craving mercy, at 
once capitulated, and William, having strengthened the 
castle, retired in triumph to Rouen. 



CHAPTER IX. 

FEUDAL SYSTEM AND MONASTICISM. 

..Leaving William secure in the possession of his ducal 
dominion, we must take a glance at the origin and 
character of the feudal system. 

No question connected with the history of early insti- 
tutions has been the subject of such controversy as that 
of the origin of this system. In the last Theories as 
century it was supposed to have been syste- feu^daf" °' 
matically introduced by the Franks on their system. 
first conquest of Gaul in the fifth century, as a means of 
governing their newly acquired possessions. 

Others, while rightly allowing it to be of gradual growth, 
have unduly pressed the distant analogies to be found in 



92 The Normans in Europe. a. d. 

Roman law, and have traced its development, more or 
less exclusively, from the forms of tenure to be found 
under the later Empire. 

These ideas, however, have been abandoned of late, 
and it is now generally held to be of purely natural, 
Two aspects that is of Frankish, growth — a gradual de- 
of feudal- velopment of Teutonic customs, which, at 
tern of land most, as they acquired form, borrowed from 
system of the analogies to be found in Roman law. In 
government, tracing the Origin of the institution, it will be 
well to consider it under its twofold aspect of a system 
of land tenure^ and a system of government. 

It had been the custom of the kings of the Merovin- 
gian House, who had ruled the Franks from the fifth 
A system of ^o the eighth century, to grant estates to 
land tenure, their kinsmen and followers, in return for 
which they exacted a pledge of fidelity. Lands so 
granted were termed beneficia; and, though 
perhaps originally held for life, rapidly tended 
to become hereditary. 

In time this custom was extended by the spontaneous 
act of the free land-owners, who, for the sake of protec- 
tion in those troubled times, surrendered their estates to 
some great man, or church, to be held of them as tenants 
by rent and service. 

Thus this beneficiary system gradually became univer- 
sal, and not improbably borrowed somewhat from Roman 
Analogies in ^^^' where the custom of holding land of 
Roman law. another by a perpetual kind of lease, was 
well known under the name of emphyteusis, while the 
grants of lands along the frontier to friendly tribes, 
on the terms of military service, formed another prece- 
dent. 

In this beneficiary system we have some of the 
elements of feudalism. The real relation, that is, the tie 



500-IOOO. Feudal System. 93 

formed through the medium of land tenure, existed between 
landlord and tenant, and a rent was in many cases 
paid. 

But the personal tie of vassalage was wanting. The 
tenant, while holding land of another, and promising to 
be faithful to the lord as a return for protection, was in 
no sense his man ; he paid him no homage. This, the 
personal tie, was given by the custom of commendation, 
whereby the inferior put himself under the personal care 
of his lord. With head uncovered, with belt commen- ' 
ungirt, his sword removed, he placed his hands, dation. 
kneeling, between those of his lord, promised to be- 
come his man or vassal, and took the oath of fealty. 

This vassalage had no relation to land. The tie 
between man and man was here a purely personal one. 
The vassal still might hold his land independently of his 
lord. He had simply, by the act of commendation, be- 
come the lord^s man — had sworn to be faithful to him, 
and sometimes to pay him military service, the lord, 
on his part, engaging to defend his vassal. 

It had long been the custom of the Germanic kings 
to collect around them a number of personal followers, 
under the name of the Comitatus or Gesiths ; and we 
shall see this system in England, under its- English 
form of thaneship, becoming universal. 

Some have supposed that this happened abroad, and 
have traced the system of commendation from that of the 
Comitatus, of which they consider it a later development ; 
others assert the independent origin of the two customs. 
In any case, the reason for the rise of the two systems is 
to be sought in the^same desire of mutual protection 
and security ; and the Teutonic institution of Comi- 
tatus, at least became merged in that of the commen- 
dation. 

Here, again, the relation of the client to the patron in 



94 The Normans in Europe. a!^ 

Roman law furnished a model from which, perhaps,, 
. , . something may have been borrowed. 

Analogies . . , , , . j 

in Roman Fmally, m the union of the benehciary] 

^^^* tie with that of commendation, the feudal] 

obligation arose. 
Union of Then, in every case where a beneficium was' 

beneficiary orranted, or handed over by the owner to be 

tie and com- . . 

mendation. received back again, the tie would be com- 
pleted by an act of homage, and the tenant would now be 
bound to his lord by tenure and by fealty. 

Thus society grouped itself round many centres orunits. 
The king granted lands to his great men, who paid homage 
to him ; they, in turn, granted out lands to those below 
them (subinfeudation) ; and all ranks tended to become 
connected together through the medium of land tenure. 

Thus far feudalism was little more than a system of 
r land tenure and society, and had not yet 

A system oi _ ■' ' -' 

government, afifccted the machinery of government. For 
this we must look to the opposite process. Hitherto the 
movement had been a growth from below ; an aggrega- 
tion of inferiors round numerous superiors or centres. 
Now the opposite tendency comes in. 

It had long been the custom of the kings to couple 
their grants of land with rights of independent judicature 
over the dwellers on that land, and, under 
dependent the successors of Charlcs the Great, the 
jurisdictions, official magistracy became hereditary. They 
acquired large estates, with the rights of jurisdiction ; 
the smaller landowners gathered round them for pro- 
tection, and became their vassals. Thus, as the central 
power lost its hold, these officials gradually established 
their independence, until, from the ministerial officers of 
the Empire, the dukes and counts became the rulers 
over separate principalities, with semi-royal rights of juris- 
diction, coinage, and legislation, enjoying the right of 



8cx)-iooo. Feudal System. 95 

waging private war, and bound to the central authority 
by the feudal tie alone. 

By the union of these two tendencies then — the 
centripetal from below, the centrifugal from Govern- 
above — the feudal system was completed, mentjuns- 

•' ^ diction f-nd 

Each held of another ; all were bound to one society or- 
another by obligation of service, fealty, and ^e^feudar 
defence ; and all eventually held of the king, idea. 
the head of the feudal fabric. 

Government and justice v/ere organised on the same 
basis. Each separate lord had his feudal court, Feudal 
with jui'isdiction over his immediate vassals courts. 
and the tenants of his demesne. This jurisdiction varied 
according to the terms of grant in each particular case. 
Causes which the lower courts were not competent to 
judge were sent to the court above, and in theory the 
ultimate appeal belonged to the royal court. 

The most important form of trial was that by combat, 
in which the accuser and accused appealed to God, and 
decided the question by the sword, but women Mode of 
and ecclesiastics were allowed to entrust their ^"^^• 
cause to a champion. If the combat was to settle a civil 
suit, the vanquished party forfeited his claim, and had to 
pay a fine ; if he fought by proxy, the champion was con- 
demned to lose his hand. In criminal cases, the defen- 
dant challenged his accuser or his judges, and if vic- 
torious, the punishment due to his offence was visited 
on them. 

The lord exercised the right of levying the feudal 
dues upon his vassals, claimed the right of private war, 
enacted petty laws in the feudal court, and in Feudal 
some cases had even the privilege of coining "ghts. 
money. 

Besides the military tenants, who were the only proper 
feudal vassals, there were many others who held improper 



g6 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

feuds on varying terms, the most usual being those who 
Tenants paid a fixed sum of money annually, and 

in free were exempt from all further service — free 

socage. 

socagers. 

Beneath these free tenants came the villeins, a class, 
perhaps, originally formed of the conquered population, 
Villeins re- ^^^ recruitcd in later times by many of the 
gardant and less fortunate who fell into this semi-servile 
position. These villeins were of two kinds — 
villeins regardant and in gross. The former held small 
plots of land, to which they were bound. They could 
not leave the land, nor could they be driven from it, but 
they might be transferred by their lord with the land, 
and had to pay him servile services by tilling the land 
of his demesne. The villeins in gross were little better 
than personal slaves, incapable of property, and destitute 
of redress against their lord except for the most 
atrocious injuries. 

To the feudal system must also be traced the growth 
of hereditary offices. It had long been the custom for 
Hereditary- the great men to surround themselves with 
offices. 21 multitude of dependents, who filled offices 

which now would be considered menial, but then were 
looked upon as honourable. In feudal times these offices 
became hereditary, and thus we find the titles of steward, 
seneschal, marshal, chamberlain, and butler held as in- 
heritable offices by great families under the greater feudal 
lords. 

The essential principle of feudalism was that of 
mutual support and fidelity. The lord promised to pro- 
Mutual tect and do justire to his vassal, the vassal 
Se feudi°^ to be faithful and do service to his lord. If 
tie- the lord omitted to fulfil his part of the con- 
tract, the vassal might abandon his allegiance. If the 
vassal neglectedhisduties,his land would forfeit to the lord. 



lOOO. 



Feudal System. 97 



The duties of the vassal were briefly these. He 
had to do 'suit and service' to his lord's court. Feudal inci- 
Of this court he was one of the judges, and cuit and 
if himself accused, would enjoy the right of evke. 
trial by his peers. He. had to serve his lord for 
forty days when required, and go into captivity Military 
for him as hostage when taken prisoner, service. 
Further, he was subject to the following incidents. 

On succeeding to his estate he had to pay 
a fine under the name of a relief. 

He had to contribute towards the dower of his lord's 
eldest daughter, towards the expenses incurred 
in knighting his eldest son, and to the ransom ^^^ ^' ^' 
for his lord if taken captive. 

The lord had in some cases the right to wardsjiip 
of the estate of his tenants during the mi- 
nority of the heir, and could marry his ward and mar- 
to his own nominee or exact a fine on refusal. "^^^" 

Closely connected with feudalism the institution of 
knighthood or chivalry grew up. This is probably to be 
traced to the primitive Teutonic custom of in- ^ . , 

, 1-1 5 • -I Knighthood 

vestnig the youth arrived at man s estate with and chi- 
his arms in the full assembly of the tribe. In "^^^^y- 
feudal times the ceremony would be performed in the 
castle of the lord, and would be conferred not only on 
his own sons, but upon the sons of his vassals, whereby 
another bond was formed between the lord and his de- 
pendents. Any kni4;ht, however, might in theory confer 
the dignity. 

By the Church the ceremony was invested with a semi- 
religious character, especially during the cru- 
sading period. The would-be knight, after bath- of knight- 
ing in a bath as if to wash away his sins, was '^°°^' 
robed in a symbolical garb, and left within the church to pass 
the night in prayer and meditation. Next morning, after 
M.H, H 



98 TJie Normans in Europe. a.d. 

confession and reception of the Eucharist, he went to his 
initiation. His arms and spurs were buckled on him 
by knights or ladies, and, kneeling before his lord, he 
received the accolade, or three blows across the shouldersjl| 
with the flat of the sword. Then swearing to serve God 
faithfully and fight for His faith, to maintain the right of 
the weak, especially of women, to be honest in all his deal- 
ings, and to be true and loyal to his lord, he rose a knight. 
The systematic establishment of this form of society 
Feudalism '^'^^ government seems to have been confined 
proper con- ^q the limits of the Empire of Charles the 

fined to . '■ 

limits of Great — that is, to Germany, France, Arragon, 

Creates "^^^ ^^^^ Italy. In the last, owing to her after 
Empire. history, it was not of lasting influence, except 

in the Norman kingdom of Sicily ; and though it was 
subsequently transferred to England by the Normans, 
whence it spread to Scotland, it there appeared, as 
we shall see, in a modified and exceptional form. 
Within these hmits the influence of the feudal idea was 
Universal Supreme. Not only did it affect the tenure 
the^feucfar^ ^^ ^^^^ "^"^^ ^^ frame work of justice and 
idea. government ; it threw its all-embracing arms 

over the Church itself. The bishops held the lands of their 
sees by feudal tenure, and paid homage for them, and hence, 
as we shall see, arose the quarrel about investitures. The 
papacy, under Gregory VII., adopted the same phraseo- 
logy and shape, became a spiritual monarchy after the 
feudal type, and aspired to be the feudal superior of 
Western Europe, to whose suzerainty the kings and the 
emperor himself should be subject. 

Its effect upon society must now be noticed. Rising 
Effect of as it did out of the circumstances and wants 
oTsJcietJr of the times, it had a meaning and did some- 
and on the tiling towards tile development of the indivi- 
dual and of society. The attempt at centrahsation intro- 



lOOO. 



Feudal System. 99 



duced by Charles the Great had been prema- individual. 

J - . 1* or good. 

ture, and, in the disorganised state of society 

which followed, fell to ruin. Here feudalism came in, 

and by its decentralising influence helped to Developed 

develope local institutions and self-govern- localisation. 

ment. 

At the same time, the tie which in theory existed 
between all members of the system, weak though it was, 
vet kept France in some sort together, and ^ 

•' ^ .... 11-1 Prevented 

prevented the rise of independent kingdoms, rise of petty 
as was the case in the Eastern empires. kingdoms. 

In the right of the vassal to defy the lord lay the germ of 
the future right of resistance to arbitrary rule ; oerm of 
and since in theory no suzerain could exact other rt^ljl^JaJfce^^ 
than the customary dues, or pass laws without reprcsenta- 

1 ■ 11 1 • 111 tion, and 

his vassals consent, who in turn was held to popular as- 
represent his sub-vassals, the idea of popular ^at"ion'^and'^' 
assent to taxation and legislation was main- taxation, 
tained. 

To it again we owe the growth of territorial as con- 
trasted with personal power. Nobihty, which had hitherto 
been purely a personal honour, became terri- Growth of 
torial. The dukes, counts, and barons as- territorial 
sumed titles from their castles or domains, and^no- 
They became the lords of the land over which ^Uity. 
they ruled, and by virtue of their position as owners of 
the land enjoyed rights of jurisdiction over their vassals. 
The kings followed suit ; once the personal kings over 
their tribes, they now became the over-lords of all the 
land occupied by their tribes, and the kings of the 
territory by that right. Hence the final change to 
territorial from personal sovereignty. More- 
over, the hereditary principle thereby perfected on the indi- 
was necessary to real advance, since with- ^''^"^'• 
out it progress was dependent upon single lives, 

U2 



lOO The Normans in Europe. a.d, 

and continuity difficult to maintain. Meanwhile, within 
certain limits, something was done towards the de- 
velopment of individual character. This will be best 
. . appreciated if we recall the character of feudal 

Description ^. ^ ^ . , , , 

of a feudal hie. Imagme a castle perched on some rock 
castle. Qj. ^|-^ detached from the mountains near, 

with a river flowing at its feet. The rock is difficult of 
access, and nature has been assisted by the work of man. 
Strong walls surround the castle. The gates are guarded by 
heavy doors, and every approach commanded by narrow 
mullioned windows, from which arrows and other missiles 
may be shot. Enter the gates and you find yourself in a 
small courtyard laid down with turf. Within, the castle 
is dark and weird, lit by straggling sunbeams which pierce 
the narrow windows. The dungeon and the cellars are 
beneath ; the hall and sleej)ing-rooms above. The hall 
alone looks cheerful. Here at least there is some space, 
some light. A huge fire crackles on the hearth, and here 
the lord and his family pass the days, here the jongleur 
or bard sings his lays, and here the feudal feasts are 
held. The lord may go forth to the war or the chase, 
but his family, for the most part, stay at home ; and in 
the long winter evenings, or in times of danger when the 
castle is tightly closed, he and his family are necessarily 
thrown together. 

The castle is also tenanted by his retainers of varying 
rank. His vassals' sons come hereto learn their knightly 
duties and the use of their weapons with the children of 
their lord. The seneschal, the marshal, the chamberlain, 
the butler, men of honourable birth, complete the circle 
The home- within the walls. At the foot of the castle lie 
th?tnkins. ^^^ humble homesteads of the villeins, and 
The chase, hard by perhaps the feudal chase, where the 
lord preserves the deer with loving care and leads forth 
his retainers to the hunt. We can now understand 



looo. Feudal System. 10 1 

the effect of such a Hfe upon the character of its in- 
mates. 

By it the ties of domestic life were intensified. The 
lord, living as he did within the castle, surrounded by his 
wife, his children, and his retainers, was drawn 
close to them. He learnt to look upon his domestic 
children, especially his eldest son, as the in- virtues. 
heritors of his name and power, and therefore to take a 
pride in them ; while the children, accustomed to their 
father's presence, learnt to love and to obey. Posjtjojj f 
The position of the wife, as mistress of woman. 
the castle in her lord's absence, was raised, she ac- 
quired dignity and commanded respect while influence of 
her influence over her children was benefi- chivalry, 

honour, 

cially exercised. Thus in every way domestic justice. 
virtues were advanced. To this end chivalry also tended. 
With much exaggeration and folly, at least it fostered the 
principles of honour and of justice, formed a school of moral 
discipline, and indirectly improved the position of women, 
whose cause every knight swore at his initiation p^^^j. ^^^ 
to support. Hence poetry and romance took romance. 
form. These, while they threw a false splendour around the 
feudal character, and obscured the glaring inconsistencies, 
the misery which surrounded the feudal castle, at least 
paved the way for literary and artistic refinement. Lastly, 
to the relations which existed between the lord 
and his retainers may be traced the origin of principle°of 
the principle of loyalty. loyalty. 

Such were some of the benefits which society owes to 
feudalism. But their influence was often weak and in- 
termittent, and they were sadly marred by Evil results 
glaring defects. The tie which bound the ^ISm 
vassal to his lord was ever weak, and the reli- isolation. 
gious bond once gone, isolation set in. Every feudal 
noble who could build a castle shut himself within its walls, 



102 TJie Normans in Europe. a.d, 

and defied his neighbours and his over-lord. Living an 
idle, useless life, he found excitement only in the chase or 
in wild, reckless adventure. Hence society was sacrificed 
to the individual. The disruptive tendencies became 
predominant. Feurdal independence arose 
and developed into anarchy, and a state of 
chronic warfare ensued which we have so often seen illus- 
trated in the history of Normandy. 

Meanwhile the gulf between classes became wider. 
It was the object of every feudal lord to gain indepen- 
dence from his suzerain, and then to crush out all beneath 
him. Before them the lesser nobles fell, and tyranny 
increased. Amidst this selfish struggle of the 
lower nobles, the interest of the lower classes was 

classes. neglected. They never had found any real 

place within the narrow circle of feudalism. Its huma- 
nising influence stopped at the knight, and the villein was 
scarce regarded as a fellow Christian. In early times 
perhaps his condition, though servile, was bearable, but. 
as the isolation between classes and aristocratic pride 
advanced, it rapidly grew worse. The gulf between the 
military and non-military classes, a term synonymous 
with noble and ignoble, grew wider every day, and justice 
became the right of the strongest. The continual anarchy 
which prevailed added to their misery. While the noble 
shut himself up in his castle, his villeins fell a victim to 
his enemies, and saw their lands and homes harried by a 
cruel, ruthless soldiery. Now and then the villeins rose, 
as in the famous insurrection of the peasants (997), only 
to find that the nobles, generally so disunited, were at 
one in their determination to crush out their liberties and 
to reduce them to abject slavery. Against this senseless 
strife and class isolation the Church protested feebly. 
Here and there a town arose and extorted privileges from 
its lord ; but for the lower classes, and for any further 



1 000-1050. Feudal System. 103 

advance, the only hope lay in the establishment of royal 
power, and the subjection of these petty tyrannies to the 
despotism of one. 

How far feudalism was at this date established in 
Normandy it is impossible, in the absence of all con- 
temporary evidence, to say. When Rollo in- condition of 
vaded Normandy the feudalising process had Normandy. 
already begun, and in the relations which existed between 
the Norman dukes and the Karolings or Capetian kings, 
respectively, we see evident traces of the Practical in- 
feudal idea. But the dependence of Nor- of^Jo^^.^"''^ 
mandy on Paris was never great, and Norman mandy. 
pride was continually displayed in assertions that her 
dukes held Normandy of ' none higher sovereign in chief 
but of God.' 

The introduction of feudal government within the 
duchy has been ascribed to Richard the Fearless ; per- 
haps it was not perfected until after the con- Gorman ac- 
quest of England. All that we know of the vernment. 
government of Normandy, anterior to that date, has thus 
been briefly summed up : ' The duke ruled as a personal 
sovereign with the advice of a council of great men. Under 
him were a number of barons, who owed their position to 
the possession of land for which they were under feudal 
obligations to him, and which they took every opportunity 
of discarding.' Their nobility was derived partly from 
Norse descent, partly from connexion with the ducal 
family, to which most of them were related, and they 
were thus kept faithful, partly by a sense of interest, partly 
by the strong hand of their master. The population of 
cultivators lived under the aristocracy — Gallic in extract! on, 
Frank in law and custom, and speaking the Romance lan- 
guage which had been created by their early history. These 
were in strict dependence on their lords, though with some 
faint remembrance of the comparative freedom which they 



104 The Normans in Eicrope. a.d. 

had enjoyed under the Frank empire, and perhaps 
enjoyed greater privileges than their equals elsewhere in 
France, while within the towns some commercial pros- 
perity and a strong commercial feeling subsisted which 
broke forth now and then, as in the city of Le Mans, 1073 
(cf. p. 175). 

Nothing but the personal character of the duke pre- 
vented the territory thus lightly held from dismember- 
ment. The strong hand had gathered all the great fiefs 
into the hands of kinsmen whose fidelity was secured by 
the right of the duke to garrison their castles, and whose 
tyrannies were limited by the right of the duke to enforce 
his own peace. Their attempts at independence led to 
continual quarrels, and were checked by ruthless bloodshed. 

In the history of Normandy during the early life of 
William, we see the two conflicting principles well illus- 
trated which at that time divided Europe, 

Internal ^ ' 

condition of and in later days were once to be united 
t e uciy. -^^ ^^ crusades. On the one hand there was 
the love of excitement and adventure, often degenerating 
Spirit of ad- iuto fcrocity, fostered by feudalism itself, which 
rel^^ious^n^ led to expeditions to foreign lands in search 
thusiasm. of plunder and fresh conquest, or found a 
worse outlet in promoting anarchy at home. On the 
other, there was the strong religious enthusiasm, which, 
now that the dread of the millennium had passed, 
took shape in renewed activity. Hence the increasing 
passion for pilgrimages to the Holy Land ; hence the 
Truce of proclamation of the ' Truce of God,' — an 
God. attempt to check the anarchy and rapine 

of private war by the terrors of ecclesiastical cen- 
sure. By this, at first, all private war whatsoever was 
forbidden ; but subsequently, as published in Normandy, 
the prohibition was limited to half the week. From the 
evening of Wednesday to the morning of Monday, no 



940-1034. Norman Monasticism. 105 

violence of any kind was allowed ; the days of Christ's 
Supper, Passion, and Resurrection, were at least to be 
kept from bloodshed. 

Not the least important outcome of the religious 
enthusiasm of the day is to be found in the great revival 
of the Benedictine rule, and the accompanying _ . , . 

,^ ' . ,^^-'.^ Revival of 

rapid growth of monasteries and perfection monastic 
of architecture in Normandy. ' It seemed,' ^p'"*^ 
says an old chronicler, ^ as if the world were awakening, 
and, casting off its ancient rags, were clothing increase of 
itself anew in a white robe of churches.' monasteries 
When first the Northern pirates invaded Gaul, churches 
and monasteries had been alike destroyed ; under Rollo's 
descendants these ravages were repaired, and the dukes 
of Normandy became the most beneficent patrons of 
ecclesiastical foundations. The famous house of Jumieges, 
which Hasting the pirate had destroyed, 
had been restored by William Longsword ; of house of 
Fecamp and Mont St. Michel owed their J^^^j^^'- 
foundation to Richard the Fearless ; and, Fe'campand 
under Richard the Good, who himself was a Michel. " 
great restorer, the movement spread to the 943-956. 
nobles. It soon became the custom of every great lord 
to have a monastery on his domain. Thus Normandy 
grew to be the richest country in the world for ecclesias- 
tical foundations, and the home of the rising Gothic 
architecture, which, borrowed from the southern plains of 
Lombardy, here reached its most vigorous growth. 
William himself, during his later years in Normandy, 
founded two abbeys at Caen, and showed himself a 
munificent patron of ecclesiastical foundations. Yet the 
most important foundation at that time, that ^ , . 

r -r. T 1 ^- 1 Foundation 

01 Bee, was not due to the patronage of the of Bee. 
great, but to the individual energy and devo- ^°^^' 
tion of a simple knight. 



ro6 The Normans in EtiTope. a.d. 

Herluin had in early life been a vassal of Count 
Gilbert of Brionne, and a prominent actor in the clannish 
quarrels of the time. Wearied of the secular life, he at 
last refused to execute some service for his lord which he 
thought unjust. In revenge, the Count ravaged his lands 
and those of his tenants. Herluin, summoned to his 
lord's court, only pleaded for his poor tenants, and de- 
manded nothing for himself. When asked what he 
really wished, ' By loving this world,' said he, ' and by 
obeying man, I have hitherto much neglected God and 
myself. I have been altogether intent on training my 
body, and I have gained no education for my soul. If I 
have ever deserved well of thee, let me pass what remains 
of hfe in a monastery. Let me keep thy love, and with 
me give to God what I had of thee.' The Count, touched 
by his words, granted him his wish. Herluin, receiving 
ordination, retired to the wild neighbourhood 
^^^^ of Brionne, collected a devoted band of men, 

who, like himself, were flying from the world, and finally 
built his monastery upon the banks of a beck in the 
valley of Brionne, near the forest of that name. The 
cloister, at first of wood, was destroyed by a storm. 
This, attributed to the malicious enmity of Satan, did not 
cast down the energy of the monks of Bee. Again they 
set to work, and built it this time of stone. 

Such were the small beginnings of Bee, founded on 
the Benedictine form. Herluin himself had not learnt to 
read till at the age of forty, and his monks were illiterate 
men. Thus Bee might have remained, an obscure and 
humble monastery, but for the accidental arrival of a 
Lanfranc Stranger who changed its fortunes and its his- 
cornes to tory. Lanfranc, a native of Pavia, had gained 

Avranches. ■' ' 5 t> 

I039- great renown as a student of civil law in that 

university, then famous for her imperial leanings and 
her schools of Roman law. Attracted, perhaps, by the 



I034-I042. 



Bee. 1 07 



fame of the Norman name, he wandered across the 
Alps and founded a school at Avranches in the C6- 
tentin. 

This journey of Lanfranc may serve to illustrate the 
all-embracing character of Norman civilisation, which 
for years attracted the best minds of Europe. Hitherto 
Lanfranc's learning had been wholly secular, but now he 
fell under the influence of the religious movement in 
Normandy. Seized one day by lawless men 
on his way to Rouen, he was robbed, and left to Bee. 
bound to a tree in the forest near the monas- '^°^'^' 

tery of Bee. Night came on and he tried to pray, but no 
psalm or office rose to his lips. ^ Lord,^ he cried, ' I have 
spent all this time and worn out body and mind in 
learning, and now, when I ought to praise Thee I can re- 
member nothing. Deliver me from my need, and with 
Thy help I will so correct and frame my life that hence- 
forth I may serve Thee.' Released next morning by some 
passers-by, he asked the way to the humblest monastery 
near, and was directed to Bee. There, prostrating him- 
self before Herluin, he begged to be received as a monk, 
and accepted the rigorous discipline of his rule. 

The monastery of Herluin, founded after the most 
severe model of St. Benedict, had no place for learning. 
Worship and prayer, work and meditation, were alone 
allowed ; but Herluin soon found that this would not suit 
the mind of Lanfranc, and by his leave Lanfranc began to 
teach. People soon flocked to hear his lectures ; he 
rapidly rose to the position of prior, and under becomes 
him Bee became the most famous school in prior. 
Christendom, and one of the intellectual centres of Europe. 
'Under Lanfranc,' says a chronicler, 'the Normans first 
fathomed the art of letters, for under the six dukes of 
Normandy scarce anyone among the Normans applied 
himself to liberal studies, nor was there any teaching 



I08 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

found till God, the provider of all things, brought 
Lanfranc to Normandy.' 

Lanfranc had come to Bee a scholar of civil law, 
but he then abandoned all secular studies and devoted 
himself to theology ; as prior of Bee, he became a 
prominent theologian, and stood forth the champion ot 
the Church in her controversy with Berengarius on the 
doctrine of the Eucharist. 

From this day forth Bee became the foremost of 
Norman monasteries, and counted among her children 
three archbishops of Canterbury. 

The monasteries of that date formed the most im- 
Importance portant social machinery of the times. The 
ofmonas- monks wcre the best agriculturists of the 

tenes at this _ o _ 

date. day, and the pioneers of civilisation. Settling 

in some unreclaimed spot, they made a clearing of the 
forest, tilled the lands, whilst their monastery formed a 
nucleus round which the farmers might settle. It thus 
became the school for the children, the hospital for the 
sick, the almshouse for the poor, the inn for the traveller. 
Nor was this all. Here alone were any remains of the 
ancient classics or Latin fathers preserved ; here alone 
the pursuits of learning and of the finer arts were 
followed. Here church music, the writing and illumi- 
nation of missals, bell-founding, organ-building were 
pursued. Here, lastly, lived the chroniclers to whom we 
are indebted for nearly all that we know of those days. 
It was chiefly through their agency that such literary 
intercourse as then existed was maintained. In the ab- 
sence of printing, and owing to the scarcity of manuscripts, 
the only way of acquiring knowledge was by sitting at 
the feet of some great scholar. Hence aspirants after 
learning wandered over Europe, from monastery to mo- 
nastery, or school to school, and Europe was drawn 
together. It was thence that all the great movements for 
regenerating society and the Church came. 



I o 1 7- 1 03 5 • ^ anfranc and Bee, 109 

CHAPTER X. 

REVIEW OF ENGLISH HISTORY. 

While William had been successfully struggling with 
his enemies in Normandy, and developing those powers 
of body and mind which were hereafter to Condition of 
nerve him to greater deeds, events had oc- England. 
curred in England of the nearest interest to himself. 

We left England under the strong hand of Canute 
the Dane, and noticed the failure of the at- r> • r 

' _ Reign of 

tempted restoration of the ^thelings by Canute. 
Robert the Magnificent. The aim of Canute ^°^^ ^°^^' 
had been to found a great Anglo- Scandinavian kingdom 
of Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and England. King 
nominally of four kingdoms and actually of three — 
England, Norway (won from St. Olaf),' Denmark, and 
half Sweden — he assumed an imperial posi- Hisimperial 
tion and looked upon himself as Emperor of position. 
the North. The Eider was the boundary of his empire ; 
his daughter Gunhild was betrothed to the Emperor 
Henry HI. ; and the Danish chroniclers loved to speak 
of the three great empires which divided the world — the 
German, the Scandinavian, and the Greek. Of this empire 
Northern England was to be the centre. Here 
Canute wished to make his home, while he ruled rule in 
his dependencies through dependent kings. England. 

As soon as he was firmly established on the English 
throne, and when those traitors who had contributed 
to his success, but whom he rightly never trusted, 
had been overthrown, his policy, at first ruthlessly severe, 
entirely changed. He now became, in spite of a few contra- 
dictions of character, a just and liberal monarch ; and 
his subjects, forgetting his title by conquest, looked upon 
him as their freely-chosen king. In this he is a fair 
type of his people, who now, as at other times, rapidly 



no The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

amalgamated with their conquered subjects, and adopted 
their more advanced civiHsation. 

Trusting to the fidehty of the Enghsh, he dismissed 
all his soldiers except a few body-guards, married the 
Norman Emma, the widow of their late king Ethelred, 
and looked to the prosperity of his country and the love 
of his people as the best defence against the surprise of 
treachery. In his legislation, while he allowed a separate 
political existence to the North and South — in the North 
the Danish law obtaining, in the South the English — no 
difference was made between Dane and Englishman. 
The Church had been the centre of national resistance 
to the Dane, yet Canute allied himself closely with it ; 
sided with the monastic party, the party of real advance 
at that time ; respected the English saints ; enforced the 
payment of Peter's Pence to Rome ; and was himself a 
liberal benefactor to ecclesiastical institutions. 

But his empire, as such empires in early days must 
be, was a purely personal one, and on his death it fell 
Dismember- ^.gain into its natural divisions. Norway, 
mentofthe which Canute had left to his son Swegen, 

empire of i -» ,r , . 

Canute, soon returned to Magnus, the representative 

T03S- of its old kings, and Denmark, left to Har- 

thacnut, passed to another distant branch. 

Meanwhile in England the love which Canute had 

. inspired by his wise and conciliatory rule was 

Harold and dissipated by the bad government of his sons, 

cnu" \c- Harold and Harthacnut, who ruled in turn. 

cession of After seven years of misgovernment, or rather 

Edward the _ _ -^ , , . f . , ' , , 

Confessor, anarchy, England, freed from the hated rule 
^°'^'^" of Harthacnut by his death, returned to its 

old line of kings, and 'all folk chose Edward to 
king,' as was his right by birth. Not that he was, 
according to our ideas, the direct heir, since Edward, 
the son of Edmund Ironside, still lived, an exile 



1035- 1042. Review of English History. iii 

in Hungary. But the Saxons, by choosing Edward the 
Confessor, re-asserted for the last time their right to elect 
that one of the hereditary line who was most available. 
With the reign of Edward the Confessor itsimpor- 
the Norman Conquest really began. We have tance as 
seen the connexion between England and the Norman 
Normandy begun by the marriage of Ethel- Conquest. 
red the Unready to Emma the daughter of Richard 
the Fearless, and cemented by the refuge offered to the 
English exiles in the court of the Norman duke. 
Edward himself had long found a home there in Canute's 
time ; the attempt to restore him and his brother has 
been already mentioned, and after Canute's death another 
attempt, probably abetted by Duke William, had ended 
in the death of Alfred and the narrow escape of Edward 
himself. Thus brought up under Norman influence, 
Edward had contracted the ideas and sympa- Edward's 
thies of his adopted home. On his election to French 

■■^ leanings. 

the English throne the French tongue became He intro- 
the language of the court, Norman favourites m^^fg into " 
followed in his train, to be foisted into im- England. 
portant offices of State and Church, and thus inaugurate 
that Normanising policy which was to draw on the 
Norman Conquest. Had it not been for this, William 
would never have had any claim on England, the ques- 
tion of Edward's will and Harold's promise would never 
have vexed the historian, and, as far as we can see, the 
interests of England and Normandy would t., 

^ _ -' i he reign 

have been indefinitely separated. To under- forms the 
stand, therefore, the Norman Conquest aright, theNorniaii 
we must consider the reign of Edward as its Conquest, 
prelude, the gradual gathering of the forces which were 
subsequently to dispute the kingdom on the field of 
Hastings, and the quarrels between the Normanising 
and English parties as the skirmishes which preceded the 



112 The Normans in Europe, a.d. 

final action. Viewed in this way alone is the reign of 
-V ^^o^f.vc Edward the Confessor seen in its true per- 

XWOp3.rLlcS. ■■■ 

1. The Nor- spective ; the apparently meaningless quarrels 

manising, i • i i , • • i • 

2. TheEng- which characterise it assume their true im- 
^^^^- portance, and the interest, otherwise dis- 
jointed, centres round the two opposing parties. 

Of these parties the two representatives are Edward 
the Confessor and Godwine, succeeded by his son Harold, 
and their quarrels will give us the natural divisions of 
the reign. 

Of all Canute's schemes one, and that his most 
mistaken one, alone seems to have left any definite trace. 
Under him England had been divided into 
four four great earldoms — Northumbria, Mercia, 

earldoms. Y.?<.'s>\. Anglia, and Wessex. This was clearly to 
perpetuate her want of unity and nationality, a fruitful 
cause of England's weakness ; and the jealousies of 
these rival houses now endangered her prosperity and 
paved the way for the Norman Conquest. 

To the north of the Humber, Northumbria was now in 
■^Q-f^. the hands of Siward the Dane, and, true to its 

umbria. Danish memories, was more independent than 

any other part of England, though still nominally subject 
to Edward the king. 

In the centre of England, Leofric and his wife Lady 
Godiva held the old division of Mercia, and 
bestowed their riches with boundless liberality 
on ecclesiastical foundations. 

In the south, Godwine ruled the old kingdom of 
Wessex : while his son Harold held East 

Wessex. . , . 

Anglia. 
Edward, raised to the throne chiefly through the in- 
fluence of Godwine, shortly married his daughter, and at 
first ruled England leaning on the assistance, and almost 
overshadowed by the power of the great earl. But 



^1 



1042-105 1. Review of English History. 113 

this ill-matched union was not based upon real identity 
of interest, and there could be little sympathy 
between them. One was the stout EngMsh- ofGodwinI 
man who looked with jealousy on the foreign- 1042-1051. 
ers pouring into England and holding the highest offices 
of state and church, - whose cry was ' England for 
the Enghsh/ and who might have said in the words of a 
future assertor of Enghsh policy against the foreign-hearted 
Henry III., in many ways the antitype of Edward, ^ Sir 
king, we tell you that the pohcy of the foreigners is both 
dangerous to yourself and fatal to the realm. These 
foreigners hate the English, and when they assert their 
rights call them traitors.' The other was the weakly 
king, who, careless of the ultimate results of his policy, 
was following his foolish personal impulse, and calling 
in foreigners to sow discord in his realm. 

Already Robert of Jumieges, a Norman, had been 
advanced to the See of Canterbury ; while Raoul the 
Staller, and a host of other foreigners, sur- Robert of 
rounded Edward in his court, and threatened Jumieges. 
to deprive the English of their just rights as ministers of 
their king. The old suspicion was now again revived by 
Robert of Jumieges, ^ who did beat into the king's head ' 
how likely it was that his brother had come to his death 
through Earl Godwine, Plainly there was cause and 
plenty for the gradual estrangement w^hich took place 
between them. 

A quarrel brought matters to a crisis. Eustace, 
Count of Boulogne, a foreigner, but brother-in-law of the 
king, as he returned from a visit to the court, demanded 
lodgings for his retinue of the city of Dover. Quarrel 
The burghers remonstrated, blows ensued, and between 

1 „ , , . • 1 1 1 Edward and 

the Frenchmen were dnven with shame and Godwine. 
loss from the town. Eustace forthwith went ^°5^* 
back to his brother-in-law and demanded vengeance for 

M, H. I 



114 The Normans ill Ettrope. -a.d. 

the insult. Godwine was ordered, as Earl of Wessex, to 
punish the rebellious townsmen of Dover. He refused, 
claimed a legal trial for the citizens, and demanded that] 
the foreigners should be expelled the country. 

Upon this the kmg, supported by Earls 
Godwine. LeofHc and Si ward, who were jealous of th 
Temporary crrowingf family of Godwine, revived the 

triumph of o ° ■' ' 

Norman- charge of the murder of the .•Etheling Alfred 
ismg party, ^^gg^j^st him, and banishing him and his sons, 
obtained a sentence of outlawry against them. Godwine, 
oblisred to bow before the united power of his enemies, 
was forced to fly the land. He went to Flanders with his 
son Swegen, while Harold and Leofwine went to Ireland, 
to be well received by Dermot, king of Leinster. Many 
Eng-lishmen seem to have followed him in his exile : for 
a year the foreign party was triumphant, and the first 
stage of the Norman Conquest complete. 

It was at this important crisis that William, secure at 
home, visited his cousin Edward. He had not hitherto 
taken any part in the affairs of England. He 
William to had been too closely employed in establishing 
England. j^|g ^^^^ authority to look abroad, and the 
accession of Edward had taken place without any aid of 
his. But friendly relations we may be sure had existed 
between the two cousins, and if, as is not improbable, 
William had begun to hope that he might some day suc- 
ceed to the English throne, what more favourable oppor- 
tunity for a visit could have been found ? 

Edward had lost all hopes of ever having any children. 
Edward the ^Etheling, the direct heir as son of Edmund 
Ironsides, was far away in Hungary, and now the English 
party had been overthrown, and the Norman party 
triumphed. William came, and, it would seem, 
promise to gained all that he desired. For this most 
Wiiham. probably was the date of some promise on Ed- 
ward's part that William should succeed him on his death. 



1052. Review of English History, 115 

The whole question is beset with difficulties. The Nor- 
man chroniclers alone mention it, and give no dates. 
Edward had no right to will away his crown, the dispo- 
sition of which lay with King and Witenagemot (or 
assembly of Wise Men, the grandees of the country), and 
his last act was to reverse the promise, if ever given, in 
favour of Harold, Godwine's son. But were it not for 
some such promise it is hard to see how William could 
have subsequently made the Normans and the world 
believe in the sacredness of his claim ; and it was not 
unlike the character of Edward to follow the temporary" 
impulse of his feelings, then full set against the family of 
Godwine, and to promise the crown to William, the best 
representative of those Norman tastes and ideas which 
he loved so well. 

William returned to Normandy ; but next year Ed- 
ward was forced to change his policy, and the attempt of 
the French party to win England for their Return of 
own was found to be premature. The Eng- ^°^^^'"^- . 

^ ° iriumph of 

lish sympathies of the people were too the English 
strongly rooted to endure the exile of Godwine, ^^^^2. 
the representative of their party, and the king ; deaf for a 
ime to the petitions from Henry I. of France and Bald- 
win of Flanders in favour of the great earl, was forced 
by the successful expedition of Godwine and the seizure 
of London, which declared for him, to submit to his 
return. 

A reconciliation followed, when Godwine solemnly 
cleared himself, by oath in a public assembly, of any 
complicity in the death of the young Alfred. (Cf. p. iii.) 

The English party thus once more triumphant, a 
general flight of foreigners ensued. Robert of Jumieges, 
the Norman Archbishop of Canterbury, the Flight of the 
leader of the Norman favourites, in haste foreigners. 
quitted his See and the soil of England, says the Anglo- 

I 2 



Il6 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

Saxon Chronicle, ' leaving behind him his pall and all 
his Christendom here in the land, even as God willed 
it, because he had taken upon him that worship as God 
willed it not,' and was deposed from his primacy ' because 
he had done most to cause strife between Earl Godwine 
and the king.' He was succeeded in the primacy by the 
Anglo-Saxon Stigand, once the chaplain of Queen Emma. 
The party of Godwine once more ruled supreme, and no 
mention was made of the gift of the crown 
Godwine. to William. Godwine, indeed, did not long 
^°^^" survive his restoration, but dying the year 

after, 1053, left his son Harold Earl of the West-Saxons, 
and the most important man in England. 



CHAPTER XI. 

LATER YEARS OF WILLIAM IN NORMANDY. 

William, warned by the experience of his own early 
Later years life, had for some time been eager to find a 
of Wiiham ^jfg ^j-jQ should bear him an heir. This was 

in JNor- 

mandy. not of morc importance to William than to 

Normandy itself. There was, indeed, no illegitimate son 
to succeed his father or to dispute the claim with a legiti- 
mate son, for William, in a profligate age, was severely 
pure. But the absence of a lawful heir meant nothing 
but a repetition of anarchy at his death. 

His choice had fallen on Matilda, daughter of Baldwin 
de Lisle, Count of Flanders, and a better choice could 
Marries not have been made. The Counts of Flanders 

Matilda of assumed at that time almost a princely posi- 
1055. tion. They could count among their ancestors 

on the spindle side the Kings of Wessex, Italy, and Bur- 
gundy, and even claimed descent from Charles the Great 



i053- William in Normandy. iiy 

himself. Their position as Counts of the border-land 
between France and Germany, stretching from Calais 
almost to the Rhine, made them peers of the Empire and 
of France, and assured them a most important position in 
either country. 

To William the alliance of Flanders, divided as it was 
from Normandy only by the narrow strip of Ponthieu and 
Boulogne, would be most valuable, and the direct descent 
of Matilda on the mother^s side from Alfred of England 
himself, might be thought to add to William's future 
claim, on England. 

The duke's interest clearly pointed to the marriage, 
and this, as well as his genuine love for Matilda, must 
explain the tenacity with which he clung to it. One 
obstacle, however, stood in his way. The ^ 

^ , - . . ^ Pope op- 

Pope, on some grounds of consangumity, for- poses the 

bad the marriage. It is not clear what those ^^^^^^^g^- 

grounds were, but the prerogative claimed by the Pope in 

such matters was very wide, and it was on the whole 

accepted by the moral consent of Europe. William, 

however, would not be thwarted, and, after a fruitless 

attempt to gain the papal dispensation, he wedded his 

bride in the teeth of papal threats. Then, however, an 

unlooked-for opponent arose. Lanfranc, , , 

,^ . - _, . , , . Lanfranc 

Prior of Bee, denounced the marriage. denounces 

This was the first introduction of William "" 
to one whose future history is so closely woven with his 
own. William, irritated at this new-found opponent, 
ordered the granges of the abbey to be fired, and Lan- 
franc to quit the duchy. But here the wit of indignation 
Lanfranc stood him in good stead. Overtaken of William. 
by the duke on a lame horse, he bade him see 
how implicitly his commands were being obeyed, and 
' Give me a better horse,' he said, ' and I shall go the 
speedier.' The duke, with a laughing reply that he was 



1 1 8 The Normans in Europe. a. d. 

the first criminal who had dared to ask a boon of him, 
, .„. , stopped the fugitive ; Lanfranc rained the 

William and . . 

Lanfranc Opportunity he desired or speaking person- 
reconciled, g^jjy ^j^j^ ^j^g duke, promised to support his 

cause, and soon after obtained the papal dispensation. 
From that moment he became his most trusted coun- 
sellor both in church and state. 

We have dwelt somewhat in detail on the circum- 
stances of this eventful marriage, because it was the cause 
of the friendship of these two men, a friendship fraught 
with momentous consequences. Also because the mar- 
riage itself marks a definite step in William's career. By 
it the ancient hostility between Normandy and 

Importance -^, ^ , . , , ^ ,tt--.t 

of the mar- T landcrs, born of the murder of Wuliam 
riage. Longsword by Count Arnulf, was fairly laid. 

The duke's position was strengthened by a powerful 
alliance, a link was added to his claim on England, and 
that bond was begun between Flanders and the future 
conqueror of England which was hereafter to be drawn 
closer by the commercial interests of the two countries, 
and to be productive of great results in the history of our 
island. 

We have now come to an important crisis in the relations 
Change in between Normandy and France. Since the 
relations days of Richard the Fearless, an alliance of 

France and the Strictest kind had existed between the 
Normandy, ^ukes and their over-lord at Paris — an alli- 
ance founded upon mutual interests. By the help of the 
Capetian kings, the Dukes of Normandy had risen to be 
the first peers of France, while to the Duke of Normandy 
the Kings of Paris had owed their throne, and the estab- 
lishment of their authority against their neighbouring foes. 
Henry himself had gained his crown against his brother 
Robert chiefly through the influence of Robert the Devil, 
and hitherto, except for a brief period during the minority 



1053- William ill Normandy. 119 

of the duke, had requited that assistance by supporting 
WilHam. 

But now their interests spht, and henceforth this 
friendship is changed for the most bitter hostility. The 
reason is not far to seek. The Duke of Nor- Reasons for 
mandy had become too powerful. Master of the change. 
a rich and fertile country running from the County of 
Ponthieu to the confines of Brittany, and from the sea to 
the very gates of Paris, they held the keys of royal France. 
They shut the king out from all hopes of advancing to the 
sea-coast, and commanded the mouth of the Seine river 
on which Paris stood. They were over-lords of Brittany, 
and closely allied by ties of marriage with that country 
as well as with Flanders and Ponthieu. Even in later 
days, when the Kings of Paris ruled over most of the 
present France, Normandy, in wealth and importance, 
though not in extent, formed a third part of the kingdom 
in which it was merged. From this we may judge of 
the overwhelming power of the duchy when the royal 
domains were confined to a narrow strip running from the 
Somme to the Loire, when the district south of that 
hardly acknowledged the king's supremacy at all, and when 
the Counts of Flanders and Anjou, and the Dukes of 
Burgundy, were scarcely less powerful than their suzerain 
himself. If the royal power were ever to increase, the 
Duke of Normandy must be humbled. So argued Henry, 
and forgetting in present necessity the benefits heaped 
upon his race by the Norman dukes, requited them by the 
most inveterate hostility. From this day the enmity of Nor- 
mandy and France, lulled to sleep since the early days 
of William Longsword, began again, was transferred to 
England when Dul^e William added that kingdom to his 
dominions, and then, taking the form of national anta- 
gonism, lasted on with hardly a break till the end of the 
fifteenth century. 



120 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

Bent thus upon humbling the dreaded power of Nor- 
mandy, Henry is found supporting against the duke 
the rebelhons which now and again break 
rebellion forth, and joining in the dangerous coahtion 
ifi^Slt' which the jealousy of neighbouring princes 
by Henry, raised against him , The movement extended 
from ducal Burgundy to the foot of the Py- 
renees. The Count of Ponthieu, Theobald III. of Blois, 
even the Duke of Aquitaine and Count of Poictiers, who 
hitherto had rarely crossed the Loire, joined King Henry 
against the Bastard upstart. 

This mighty host was divided into two detachments. 
One under Odo, King Plenry's brother, was to attack 
Normandy from the north by way of Beau- 
vasion of vais, and to advance on Rouen. The other, 
Normandy, under the king himself, assembled at Mantes, 
and was to march on Lisieux and the sea. Thus sur- 
rounded by his foes, the Bastard might, they hoped, be 
utterly crushed or driven to the west. There, shorn of 
his eastern dominions, the flower of his ducal coronet, 
he might be suffered to retain the districts of the Bessin 
and the Cotentin, while the old grant of Charles the 
Simple should be restored to the successors of his throne, 
and Normandy, thus humbled, would no longer endanger 
the growing power of the king. 

Their hopes were soon rudely to be overthrown by the 
strategy of Duke William. Advancing himself against 
the king, he held the royal forces in check as they crossed 
the border to the south. Meanwhile his forces, massed 
under his most trusty leaders, marched against Odo, 
surprised him in the town of Mortemer, and 

Battle of ^, . . . , ' 

Mortemer, cut his contmgent to pieces. A messenger 
1054. despatched by the duke to the king rudely 

awakened him from his slumbers in the grey morning 



1054-1058- William in Normandy. 121 

with the cry, ' Up, up. Frenchmen ! ye sleep too long ; go 
bury your friends that he dead at Mortemer ! ^ A panic 
seized the royal forces, and Normandy was 
evacuated without a blow being struck against is evacu- ^ 
the duke himself. ^l^- 

inree years 

Awed by William's superior strategy, which peace, 
hitherto he had had no opportunity of display- ^°^^ ^°^ ' 
ing, the coalition melted away, and William, after showing 
great leniency to his captive foes, enjoyed three years 
of peace, which he devoted to the government of his 
country and the reform of ecclesiastical abuses. 

The peace of three years was soon over. A new 
coalition now arose against the duke, in which a new 
enemy appears —Geoffrey of Anjou. 

The Counts of Anjou, one day to ascend the throne of 
England and gain the realm which Normandy -^^^^^^ ect 
had won, can be traced back to the ninth cen- of Angevin 
tury, when Charles the Bald granted a domin- ingeiger, 
ion to Ingeiger, a Breton woodman, first Count. ^^^"^ Count. 

For a century, however, they bear no very important 
part in French affairs. Their district was a small one, 
marked out by no strong natural boundaries, and at the 
end of the tenth century they were entirely overshadowed 
by the power of their neighbours — the Counts of Blois 
and Champagne. With the accession of Fulk Nerra 
(the Black), their destinies began to rise. Fulk Nerra. 
Under this powerful Count we first see that 987-1040- 
type of character displayed which henceforth so strongly 
marked his race. To the cool-headed and clear-sighted 
qualities of a consummate general he added a power of 
organization, a faculty of statesmanship, and an unscrupu- 
lousness in choice of means which soon raised Anjou into 
one of the most important powers in France, and which, 
coupled as they were with the most savage cruelty, made 



122 The Normans in Eiu^ope. a.d. 

his name the terror of those days. His long reign is a 

series of triumphs. Brittany was defeated under Conan. 

Eudes of Blois was humbled at Pontlevoi. His 

1016. dominions were extended to the south by the 

seizure of Saumur and the conquest of Touraine. 

He had interfered in the affairs of France at the 
death of Robert, unsuccessfully supporting Queen Con- 
stance and her second son Robert against King Henry 
(p. 84). On his death he handed on Anjou — its borders 
extended, its powers consolidated — to his son Geoffrey 
Martel (the Hammer), a man hardly his inferior. 

Continuing his father's policy, Geoffrey had wrested 

the city of Tours, the last city of Touraine which remained 

Geoffrey ^^ them, from the house of Blois (1044) and this 

Martel, aggression had brought upon him the united 

forces of Normandy and France, then allies. 

With the exception of this short quarrel, Normandy 
and Anjou had rarely come into contact. Their dominions 
_ . nowhere touched each other : but between 

Jjispute , 

about them lay the County of Maine, the possession 

^^"^- of which they both desired, and which hence- 

forth forms a constant source of dispute. 

The claims of William to the County were founded 
upon the gift of Charles the Simple to Rollo. This claim, 
however, had been little more than nominal, and was 
now disputed by Geoffrey as guardian of Hugh, the 
young Count of Maine. 

This probably had been the motive of Geoffrey in sup- 
porting the rebels of Alengon in the early days of Wilham 
(91), a quarrel which led to the occupation by William of 

the castle of Domfront on the soil of Maine, 
1048. . ,.,-,-, 

important as commandmg the valley of the 

Mayenne, to the west of the Norman frontier, and that 

of Ambrieres on the Varenne hard by. Since that time 

Geoffrey had in vain endeavoured to regain these castles, 



105S-1060. William in Normandy. 123 

and now he eagerly embraced the opportunity of hum- 
blino; his powerful rival, and joined the Kingr ^ ,. . ■ 

^* -rr-i-,-.-! •-.• 1 Coalition of 

of France. United by their hostility to the Henry of 
common foe, they concerted a joint invasion Ceo^ey of 
of the duchy. Entering the country from the Anjou 

/-^ r tf • 1 1 i-r-> against 

County of Hiesmes, they advanced on Bayeux, wiiiiam. 
ravaging as they went. Then turning to the ^°5^' 
south-east, they advanced on Caen, which was sacked. 
They now intended to cross the Dives, and harry the 
rich district of Lisieux to the east. 

Meanwhile William, entrenching himself in his own 
castle of Falaise, had coolly waited his opportunity, 
deteniiined to attack them as they returned gorged with 
spoil, their discipline relaxed by success. 

The hour had now arrived. Rapidly marching from 
Falaise, he came upon them just as they were crossing 
the Dives. The king with the vanguard had Varaville. 
already passed the stream and ascended the victor of 
heights which overlook the Dives on the west William. 
bank. The rest were threading their way along a narrow 
causeway which led across low and marshy lands on the 
left bank. The tide was rising, and the ford would soon 
become impassable. This was the moment chosen by 
William for his attack, and the result was decisive. 
Huddled together on the narroAV causeway, swept by the 
Norman arrows which we find here first mentioned, the 
main body of the army was annihilated, while Henry, 
prevented by the tide which now had risen from sending 
aid, looked on in helpless rage from the heights beyond 
at the ruin of his army. 

This decisive victory, in which again the strategy of 
the duke had been pre-eminently displayed. Death of 
ended the war. Peace was made, and two Oeoftey" 
years afterwards both his enemies were re- io6o- 
moved by death. . 



124 ^^^^ Normans in Etirope. a.d. 

Henry left his son Philip under the guardianship of 
the Count of Flanders his brother-in-law, father-in-law 
Baldwin V ^^^ trusty ally of WiUiam. Geoffrey's domi- 
of Flanders nions were divided by his nephews Geoffrey 

guardian of .„„_,,. . . i r> • 

the young and Fulk Rechm ; Anjou and banitonge 
Phdip. falhng to the former, to the latter the city and 

County of Tours. A short respite from war ensued of 
three years' duration. During that time we find 
pea^ce/^ ^ William crushing out the remaining seeds of 
ic 60-1063. rebellion, banishing turbulent nobles and 
sternly repressing all who opposed his will. This 
is the date of the famous ordinance of the Curfew bell, 
Curfew bell issued at the synod of Caen. By this a bell 
1061. was to be rung at evening when prayers should 

be offered, and all people should get themselves within 
and shut their doors. It was no doubt resorted to as a 
system of police, to secure the quiet of the country, and 
was subsequently introduced by William into England. 

Normandy was then at rest ; not so the busy duke. 
Gonquest of '^^^ County of Maine had, as we have seen, 
Maine, long been an object of desire, and now an op- 

^^ ^' portunity offered to establish his authority 

there, and turn the vague grant to Roilo into possession. 

We last left Maine in the hands of the young Count 
Hugh, under the guardianship of Geoffrey. Hugh died. 

1051. prematurely in 105 1, and Geoffrey had occu- 

occupies pied Le Mans, and driven out the widow and 

Srof" children of Hugh. But on the death of Geof- 

Count frey, Herbert, the son of Hugh, had appealed 

to William. He then commended himself to 
1061. 
Herbert of the duke, offered to hold Maine as a Norman 

appeals to ^^^j ^^^ giving his sister -Margaret in betrothal 
William and to Robert, WilHam's eldest son, promised him 

consents to . .., , . ,. , , , t ■,.,,, 

hold Maine the succession if he himself should die childless. 
^^^^To6z. "^^o years afterwards Herbert died, and forth- 



1060-1063. William in Normandy, 12^ 

with William claimed the fulfilment of the com- Herbert 
pact. The house ofAnjou no longer disputed his li^m' claims 
title ; but within the County the people refused Maine. 

He IS op- 

to accept the Norman duke, and asserted the posed by 
rights of Walter of Mantes, the uncle, by mar- MaIS,°^ 
riage, of the late Count Herbert. His claim 1063. 
had no support but the wishes of the people. Three 
daughters, of whom Margaret was one, were still alive, 
and their title at least was better than that of Walter. 
.Notwithstanding this, the dread of the Norman duke 
raised a formidable party, and war became inevitable if 
William did not mean to be baulked of his prey. 

Neglecting the city of Le Mans, William ravaged the 
rest of the County, and by the terror which his cruelty 
inspired forced Walter to surrender the city William 
and withdraw his claim. Thus, robbed of ^^'^'^'^^^ 

' Mame and 

their leader, Maine submitted. Walter and conquers it. 
his wife soon after died,<.some said poisoned by the diike, 
and Maine at last was added to the ducal coronet. 

The conquest of Maine completes the history of 
William in Normandy. Important as that acquisition 
was in itself, it is more important as forming a prelude 
to the Conquest of England, on which our attention now 
centres. 

CHAPTER XII. 

THE CONQUEST OF ENGLAND. 

On the death of Godwine, Harold had succeeded to his 
earldom of the West Saxons, and become the leading 
man in England. Godwine had been a man 1052. 

of ready speech and policy, but Harold was a ofal^tdi 
man of action. With wider sympathies and England. 
knowledge than his father, he showed a more conciliatory 
spirit towards the remnant of the Norman party, while he 



126 The Normans in Euj^ope. a,d. 

maintained the true line of English policy. In the years 
that followed, the power of Harold steadily increased. 

In 1055 Siwardj Earl of Northumbria, died, and 
Northumbria was granted to Tostig, Harold's brother, 

1055. whereby the influence of his house was tem- 
No^rthum-''^ porariiy extended to the north, while Gurth, 
briaand another brother, ruled in East Anglia, In 

Gurth East , ' , . ^ ^ 

Anglia. the Same year a dangerous competitor lor the 

Edward the thxQYiQ was removcd by death. Edward the 
^theling. ^theling, the son of Edmund Ironsides, had 
been recalled from Hungary by the Witan, the call being 
looked upon apparently as equivalent to a recognition of 
his claim to the succession. But hardly had he gained 
the shores of England when he died. His death, lamented 
by the English chroniclers as a national loss, is by 
calumny laid by them to the door of Harold, as that of 
the ^theling Alfred had been attributed to Godwine. No 
doubt Harold was the chief gainer by his death. But 
this alone cannot be considered sufficient to establish his 
guilt, and Harold certainly was never accused of it during 
his life. 

By the death of Edward the ^theling, Harold's power 
was still further increased. Edgar the JEtheling and 
Margaret his sister now alone remained of the hereditary 
line. Of these one was a woman, and no instance had 
yet occurred of a queen sitting on the English throne. 
Harold The Other was too young to rule, and, if we 

assumes a^ may judge from his subsequent career, too 
position. weak to lead a party. From this date, there- 

fore, Harold assumed a semi-royal position. 

In 1062 we find him engaging in a Welsh war, and 

subduing the independent princes there, a 

His Welsh Campaign which added to the prestige of his 

^'''^^- name, and left him without dispute the greatest 

man in England. 



1 052-1066. The Conquest of England. 127 

Two years afterwards, according to the most pro- 
bable account, Harold, driven by stress of 
weather on the coast of Ponthieu, was seized Harold." 
by its Count. No sooner did William colTt^r '° 
hear of this than he demanded and obtained Ponthieu, 
his release ; and then, as the price of his assist- wiiHam's 
ance, extorted an oath from Harold, soon to be ^^"ds. 
used against him. Harold, it is said, became his man, 
promised to marry William's daughter Adela, to place 
Dover at once in William's hands, and support his claini 
to the English throne on Edward's death. 
By a stratagem of William's, the oath was ^ ^ .' 
unwittingly taken on holy relics, hidden by the duke 
under the table on which Harold laid his hands to swear, 
whereby, according to the notions of those days, the oath 
was rendered more binding. Then, after aiding William 
to subdue Conan of Brittany, who had thrown off his 
allegiance to the duke, he returned to England. 

Two years more, and Edward the Confessor died. 
Since the return of Godwine and the overthrow of the 
Norman party he had let things go as they Death of 
would, and as death drew on he neglected Edvvard the 
more and more the aftairs of state. Wrapt 1066. 
up in deeds of devotion, and in the foundation of 
his abbey of Westminster, he gave his kingdom hardly 
a thought, and passed away with an uncertain recom- 
mendation of Harold to the Witan, and with the gloomy 
prophecy on his lips which rang the death-knell of his 
race : ^ Because those who are of most account in this 
kingdom — earls, bishops, abbots — are not what they 
seem to be, but are servants of the devil, God has given 
this land accursed of Him into the hand of the enemy 
within a year and a day^^ 

The Witan met. No mention was made of Edward's 
promise to William or of Harold's oath. Voices were 



128 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

raised for Edgar the ^^theling, even for Duke William ; 
TT J ■■ but the national feeling was too strong to 

elected accept the latter, and Edgar was as yet a strip- 

AVlt3.Il 

ling, and unfit to rule the kingdom at such a 
crisis. If the royal line was not to succeed, who better 
fitted for the post than the man whom Edward had 
recommended Avith his last breath, the man who for the 
last ten years had been king all but in name ? 

Harold was elected king. The families of Si ward 
and Leofric did not oppose the choice, the opposition 
of Edwin and Morkar, grandsons of Leofric, who now 
held Northumbria, being perhaps bought off by the mar- 
riage of their sister Edith to Harold. Thus by 1066 the 
house of Godwine was seated on the English throne. 

By this act the Witan reasserted their undoubted 
right to elect the king, and rejected at once the promise 
of Edward and the oath of Harold. No instance had 
yet occurred, indeed, of their thus electing a man not of 
princely birth ; but in the case of Canute they had 
established their right to depart from the royal line, and 
in choosing Harold they best consulted England's in- 
terests, and chose the man in whom the best hope for 
the country lay. Hardly, however, was Harold on the 
throne than he was called to support his claim by arms. 

His brother Tostig had been deprived of Northumbria 
for his cruelty and oppression, and banished the realm 

1066 (lo^S)' He now took the opportunity to 

Invasion of avenge his wrongs, and with the sanction of 
HaraTd Wilfiam ravaged the coast of England. Then, 

Hardrada. forgetting his alliance with William, he turned 
to Harald Hardrada, king of Norway, with whom he 
agreed to divide the realm of England. Thus, then, this 
knight errant of the eleventh century, who had seen Con- 
stantinople, the Holy Land, and the southern shores of 
Italy, and who, once a landless wanderer, had now secured 



io66. Election of Harold. 129 

the kingdom of Norway, hoped to regain the crown of 
England once held by Canute. He came, the Saga tells 
us, bringing with him a mighty ingot — so large that 
twelve strong youths could scarcely bear it — part of the 
treasure collected in his southern expeditions, a treasure 
which was to pass as the reward of victory fir-^t to the 
English Harold and then to William the Bastard.^ 

The invasion of Hardrada apparently had no con- 
nexion with that of William. It was carried out without 
his sanction, perhaps without his knowledge, and had it 
been successful, Hardrada would certainly have resisted 
the claims of the Norman duke. As it turned out, how- 
ever, by calling off Harold's attention from the south 
at this moment, it materially contributed to William's 
ultimate success. The invasion was a formidable one. 
The isles of Shetland, Orkney, and Iceland, then owing 
nominal allegiance to Norway, sent their contingent, as 
well as the Danish settlers in Ireland. Even Malcolm 
of Scotland, who owed his crown to English help, in- 
fluenced by his marriage with a princess of Orkney, lent 
his aid. 

Hardrada, having first touched at the Orkneys and 
Shetlands to collect his forces, sailed south ^^ , ^ 

' -Hardrada 

past the mouth of the Tyne, thence to Scar- and Tostig 
borough and to the Humber, ravaging as he Humber ^ 
went. Then, advancing up the Humber, he and land 

' 1 near York, 

landed at Riccall, near York. In vain the which opens 
Earls Edwin and Morkar attempted to de- ''^^^^^^• 
fend their earldom ; they were defeated, and even York 
opened its gates. 

But the triumph of Hardrada was short-lived. Harold, 
hearing of the danger, at once marched north, and 
meeting his foes at Stamford Bridge, won a decisive 
victory. Tostig and Hardrada both fell, and the 

1 For earlier life of Harald Hardrada, cf. p. 30. 

M, H. K 



I30 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

offer of Harold when treating before the battle, to 
TT ij ■ ^ive the Kiner of Norway seven feet of "earth 

Harold wins . 

the battle of or a little more, as he was taller than other 
Bridge.'^ men, was literally fulfilled. From the vic- 

Deatli of torious battle-field of Stamford Bridge Harold 

iostig and " , 

Haraid was recalled by the news that William had 

already landed on the shores of Wessex to 
dispute his claim. 

Wilham was hunting in the forest of Rouen when he 
heard the news of Harold's election. He at once affected 
„,.,,. , the most unfeigned astonishment, denounced 

Wjlliam s ° . 

indignation Harold as a perjured man, and drawmg up a 
ofHaroM's specious claim, appealed to Christendom. In 
accession this appeal the wily diplomacy of William and 

He appeals ,._-. , ^ 

to Christen- his two chief fricnds, Lanfranc and William 
dom. Fitz-Osbern, is strongly illustrated. He de- 

clared himself to be hereditary heir in his own right 
and that of his wife, and thus appealed to the idea of 
hereditary succession then growing in Europe. The 
religious feelings of the day were enlisted by his as- 
sumption of the position of an injured man punishing 
the false, perjured Harold. The Normans he reminded 
of the ill-feeling which had existed since his father's 
attempted invasion, and of the insults they had to avenge ; 
the murder of the ^theling Alfred when supported by 
Norman arms ; the outrage inflicted on Eustace of 
Boulogjie by the rude citizens of Dover ; the subsequent 
deposition of a Norman archbishop, Robert of Jumieges, 
and the expulsion of the Normans by the proud, upstart 
family of Godwine. To the Pope, Alexander H., and his 
great minister Hildebrand, he speaks, probably at the 
suggestion of Lanfranc, of his invasion as a great mis- 
sionary work which shall purify the corrupted Anglo- 
Saxon state and church, and bring England more closely 
under the sway of Rome. Thus, having united the suf- 



io66. Invasion of Har aid Hardrada. 131 

frages of Europe, he rapidly gathered an army, and ap- 
pealed to the ordeal of battle in vindication of his: claims. 

While, then, we deny absolutely that William had any 
claim to the throne of England, we must at least acknow- 
ledge the skill by which he gathered up the threads, gave 
to his unjust claim the character of justice, and overcame 
the opposition of the Norman nobles, many of whom 
were unwilhng to join in the enterprise. We cannot but 
admire the masterly statesmanship by which, in the face 
of an ever-watchful over-lord at Paris, he was enabled 
to gain the alliance, passive or active, of nearly all the 
powers of northern Europe, and prevented the Capetian 
king from allying himself with Harold or making a diver- 
sion by an attack on Normandy. 

The army and transports were collected at the mouth 
of the Dives. Thence sailing to St. Valery ^ 
on the coast of Ponthieu, William waited tions for the 
until the south wind should blow, meanwhile 
spurring the religious enthusiasm of his army by frequent 
religious rites. At last the long wished-for 
wind arose, and, leaving Normandy to the ^^ " ^^' 
care of his wife Matilda, he sailed for Pevensey. 

The landing was effected without any opposition. 
Harold was still in the north, and had failed to keep an 
arm.y together in the south. As William step- j^^ j^^^^g ^^ 
ped upon the shore, he slipped and fell. The cry Pevensey 
of the men, 'An evil omen this ! ' was answered vances to 
by William^s ready wit. ' By the splendour of Hastings. 
God,' said William, holding up a handful of earth in his 
closed fist, ' I have taken seisin of my kingdom. The 
earth of England is in my hands.^ Then ordering his 
ships to be beached and dismasted, that all idea of 
retreat might be prevented, he marched forwards to 
Hastings. 

Meanwhile the forced marches of Harold had brought 



132 The Normans in Ettropc. a.d 

him to the south. Northumbria lent him no aid. The 
Earls Edwin and Morkar cared little for the 
marches fate of Harold or the south of England, and 

takes'up"his thought perhaps that the struggle might enable 
position at them to divide the kingdom and establish their 
own authority in the north. But the rest of 
England readily answered to his call, and with his army 
thus recruited, Harold marched to the hill of Senlac. 
This hill, of no great height, forms the last spur of the Sus- 
sex downs running from the west to the south-east. Con- 
nected with the higher ground behind by a narrow neck, 
it commands the broken ground at its foot, and stands in 
the face of an enemy approaching from the south. 

The spot was well chosen, and here Harold, wisely 
deciding to await the Norman onslaught, formed a 
palisade in front of his position, just below the crest 
of the hill to the south. His army was composed 
entirely of footmen, but their weapons were of various 
kinds. Most had javelins and clubs, some only pitch- 
forks, staves, and stones. These he marshalled to the 
right and left, while he himself, surrounded by his 
own ^ house-carls ' or body-guard, and the chosen warriors 
of Kent, Essex, and London, formed the centre round the 
golden dragon of Wessex and the royal standard. These 
were better protected with helmets, coats of mail, and 
shields. They wielded javelins and a double-handed axe, 
a formidable weapon which struck down horse and man at 
a blow. The strength of the English plainly lay in the 
closeness of their array and their defensive position. If 
the battle were to be won at all, this must be broken 
through, and, if possible, the English induced to leave 
their vantage ground. 

William's quick eye at once discerned this, and he 
made his dispositions accordingly. His army was divided 
into three divisions. The Bretons, under Count Alan,^ 



io66. The Conquest of England. 133 

on the left, the French and other mercenaries, under 
Rogerof Montgomery, on the right. These were 

WillisTn*s 

to attack the Enghsh on the flanks, while Wil- disposition 
liam, with his Norman troops, was to advance of his troops. 
against the chosen men of Harold, and penetrate to the 
royal standard itself. These divisions each consisted of 
three different lines. First came the archers, slingers, 
and bowmen, thrown out in skirmishing order to harass 
the foe and disorder their close array ; next the 
heavy-armed infantry who might support their attack, 
and by breaking through the palisades prepare the way 
for the mounted knights who formed the third line. 

The preceding night had been passed in different ways 
by the two armies. The English eat, drank, and sang 
their national songs. The Normans prayed and confessed 
their sins. Two Norman prelates, Geoffrey of Coutances 
and Odo of Bayeux, William's half-brother, were with the 
army, and William, anxious to maintain the character of 
a leader in a religious war, stimulated his soldiers to 
vows and acts of devotion. 

Thus morning arose upon the opposing hosts. Then 
William, reminding his soldiers that they came to punish 
the perjury of Harold and to wipe out the in- ^j^^ attack 
suits they had suffered, vowed to found an abbey begins. 
on the battle-field if God should favour his cause, and 
ordered the attack. The archers led the way, and, dis- 
charging heavy flights of arrows, covered the advance of 
the heavy infantry. . This, however, failed to break 
through the palisades, and when the cavalry charged, they 
too were beaten back. Then with loud cries of 'Out, 
out ! ' the English attacked the Bretons on the left, who 
broke and fled. 

The first charge had failed. William had fallen, it 
was said, and all seemed lost. At this crisis the bravery 
of William saved the day. While Odo rallied the fugi- 



134 1^^^^ Normans in Europe. a.d. 

tives, William tore his helmet from his head, crying, ^ I 
live, and by God's grace I will conquer yet ! ' and once 
more led the attack. His horse fell, pierced by the javelin 
of Gurth, Harold's brother. He rose to his feet and felled 
his adversary with his mace, while Leofwine, another 
brother, was smitten by an unknown hand. Then seizing 
a stray horse, once more he led the cavalry on. In vain 
they threw themselves upon the serried ranks of the 
English, whose close array and greater weight told upon 
their foes, and the second attack was repulsed. The 
position was too strong to be gained by force. This Wil- 
liam saw and had recourse to stratagem. Ordering a 
feigned retreat, he induced the English to leave their 
vantage ground and rush down with shouts of victory. 
Then William turned, and, charging the broken ranks 
unprotected by the palisades which they had left be- 
hind them, began to pierce the opposing masses. Still 
the English rallied. They formed a close array, and 
locking their shields together, stood their ground. Their 
wings were broken, and many an Englishman had died, 
but the centre still stood firm ; still the standard waved 
where Harold fought. 

One more device remained, and William seized upon 
it. The arrows could not pierce the English shields. He 
therefore gave the order to shoot up into the air. The 
effect was instantaneous. Helmets were pierced, eyes 
were put out, and the English, raising their shields to 
protect their heads, were overthrown by a renewed attack 
of infantry and cavalry. 

As the sun went down, an arrow pierced Harold's eye. 
The Normans closed in upon the standard. The rest of 
Harold ^^ English army broke and fled, and night 

slain. found William victorious on the field of Senlac. 

In the morning the body of Harold was found where the 
standard stood, and, by the orders of William, obtained a 



io66. The Conquest of England. 135 

decent burial. Thus ended the battle of Hastings, a bat- 
tle between the old world and the new, of character of 
infantry armed with battle-axe, javelin, and the battle. 
pointed stake against the archers and the cavalry of the 
Normans. Two centuries at least were to pass before 
infantry learnt how to face the feudal array, and wiped 
out on the fields of Bannockburn and Courtrai the dis- 
grace which Hastings cast upon their arms. 

The battle of Hastings won, the next object of William 
was to secure the south-east, and especially Dover and 
Romney, the two most important of the Cinque 
Ports, commanding, as they did, the communi- secures the 
cation with the Continent. Thither, then, he south-east 

' ' and 

directed his march, and not till he had re- marches on 
ceived the submission of these places, as well 
as that of Canterbury and Winchester, the real capital of 
England, did he turn north to London. 

The great want of the English after the death 
of Harold lay in the absence of a national leader. Had 
an Alfred or an Edmund Ironside ai'isen, William 
might yet have been driven from English soil ; but in her 
greatest time of need no such man appeared. England 
might have looked to some member of the three great 
families — Godwine, Siward, Leofric — who had for so 
long shared the chief power in the land. Harold's 
brothers, however, had fallen with him on the field of 
Senlac. Of his sons no mention was ever made ; no 
candidate from the house of Godwine, therefore, was 
forthcoming. Of the other two, Waltheof, the son of 
Siward, had not yet made himself a name, and 
although Edwin and Morkar, the grandsons of ^theiing^ 
Leofric, would gladly enough have accepted the chosenkmg, 
crown, their Mercian interests by no means abandoned 
tallied with those of Wessex. Once more f"^'' William. 
men looked to the royal line, and the ^theling Edgar, 



136 The Normans in Etirope. a.d. 

the grandson of Edmund Ironside, boy though he 
was, was chosen king. Such a leader did but weaken 
the national cause, and no sooner did William approach 
William ^^^ ^^^y ^^ London than all opposition faded 

king of away. The northern earls, Edwin and Mor- 

Chnstmas kar, would hazard nothing, and, dismayed 
1066. ^Qy William's advance, made haste to retreat 

northwards. The bishops, after a brief display of re- 
sistance, counselled submission. The Witan sent in their 
adhesion to William, and at Christmas his coronation 
finally made him King of England. 

Thus ended the national resistance of England. 
But the country was by no means conquered. East of 
Work yet to ^ ^^^^ from Norwich to Dorsetshire William 
be done. y^r2i.s king. All north and west of that was 

yet to be won. 

The national differences still surviving the Danish 
Conquest forbade the north to follow the lead of the 
south, and in the west the old spirit of independence 
which had so long struggled against Wessex, lasted on. 
As in the time of Alfred and of Edmund Ironside, 
England had been conquered chiefly through her want of 
unity. Too little united to join against the common foe, 
she had allowed Harold to be defeated at Hastings ; but 
her very want of unity led many to refuse the decision of 
a battle in which they had taken no share. 

Under these circumstances the policy of William is 
somewhat difficult to justify. At Christmas he was 
William crowned. In the following March we find 

leaves Eng- him leaving for Normandy, and relieving the 
Normandy, anxiety of his wife Matilda whom he had left 
1067. g^g regent. The apparent quiet of the country 

may have lulled him into a fancied security. The pro- 
bable leaders of revolt, Edwin, Morkar, Waltheof, had 
submitted, and these he intended to take with him as 



1067. The Conquest of England. 137 

hostages ; possibly the step was taken with the intention 
of testing the fidehty of the Enghsh. Having therefore 
granted a charter to London, and appointed Wilham 
Fitzosbern Earl of Herefordshire, and Odo Bishop of 
Bayeux, his half brother, regents, he left England for his 
duchy. 

He was not long left in doubt. His own master-hand 
removed, the spirit of revolt revived. The government 
of the regents seems to have been needlessly The English 
harsh, and numerous local risings which '■^'^^^' 
only wanted unity of action to be really formidable, 
threatened the stability of his newly won in Kent 

under 
throne. Eustace of 

The men of Kent united with Eustace of fn^fij^^y^st 
Boulogne, who was probably actuated by under Edrlc 
jealousy of William, and attacked the Cinque At Exeter 
Ports. In the west, the English and Welsh li'jfthSof^' 
united against the common foe under Edric Harold, 
the W^ild and the prince of Wales, while Exeter, long 
looked upon as the dowry of the queens of England, rose 
at the instigation of Githa, the mother of Harold. 

William, hov/ever, did not hurry back till the danger 
of foreign aid from Norway and Denmark warned him 
that he must strike at once. The country _, 
again was pacified, but no sooner did the aid from 
expected help from Denmark come than revolt ^nd sSJt^ 
became once more general. The sons of land. The 
Harold landed in Devonshire with a force comes 
from Ireland. In the north, the two Earls s^'^^'^l- 
Edwin and Morkar, gaining the aid of ^Malcolm of Scot- 
land, already the husband of Margaret sister of Edgar 
the yEtheling, threw off their allegiance, and the fire staff 
passed from village to village between Tees and Derwent. 
Waltheof held out at York. The Danes, joined by Edgar 
the ^theling, ravaged the east coast, and Hereward, the 



138 The Normans ill Europe. a.u. 

last representative of southern resistance, occupied the 
Isle of Ely. 

The danger was indeed great ; but it served only to 
bring out more strongly the superiority of William as a 
tactician and a statesman, while, as he cast off all 
hopes of conciliation, his character becomes more stark 
and stern. 

The real enemies to be disposed of were the Danes. 

These William bought off, and then turning upon the 

disorganised rebels, by a series of masterly marches he 

defeated them in detail. Three years it took him entirely 

to put down the rebellion ; but by 1071 the 

Danes are , , ^ . , , . 

bought oft last element of resistance was crushed out m 

bemorT^^" ^^^ ^^^^ °^ ^^y^ ^^^ England lay prostrate 
quelled. at his feet. Then crossing the Scottish border 

^°^^' a.nd the Lowlands, he penetrated to the heart 

of Scotland and forced Malcolm to swear allegiance. 

The country had suffered terribly. For sixty miles 
between the Humber and the Tees it was reduced to a 
wilderness, and many English, despairing of success, left 
their native land, some to settle in the Lowlands, where 
they introduced English institutions, some to wander 
away to Constantinople, to give their services to the 
Emperors of the East in the bands of the Varangian 
Guards and defend the Eastern Empire from the attacks 
of the Normans of Apulia. 

By 1 07 1, then, William may be called the master 
of England. Edwin had fallen in a skirmish, Morkar, 
Waltheof, and Hereward had all submitted ; there was 
no one to lead the English to revolt. The only part of 
Wales and England which remained unsubdued was the 
the West of extreme west. This was not finally reduced 
finally till 1081, the date which also saw the final 

reduced. submission of the Welsh. 

In tracing the course of William's Conquest of 



I07I. The Conquest of England. 139 

England, we are struck at every point with the different 
genius of the two peoples. We see the Saxons failing in 
their resistance, brave and sturdy though it was, through 
their strong spirit of localisation and consequent want 
of imperial unity, ever the secret of their weakness when 
called upon to resist their foes : the Normans excelling 
in their strong organization and administration execu- 
tive and military, under their one great leader. While 
above all rise the stern features of William's character, 
with his unbending will and masterly qualities of general- 
ship and strategy. 

With the Conquest of England the Norman power 
reached its zenith. They had now succeeded to the fairest 
possession of their forefathers the Northmen. Scotland 
and Ireland were yet unwon, and on Spain they had lost 
their hold ; but England and the northern shores of 
France were theirs, while in the south they had gained 
Calabria and were soon to be masters of Sicily. 
(Cf. p. 78.) 

The Norman name was now known to the whole of 
Europe. France, Germany, and Italy had long acknow- 
ledged their influence. Constantinople already dreaded 
their name, and was soon itself to be attacked in the 
Crusades by a mighty coalition led by them. 

Of this great people William was now the most im- 
portant figure. His countrymen in the south, though 
independent of him, were on friendly terms. In the 
north he held a kingdom larger than that of any of 
his neighbours, except perhaps the Emperor, while his 
suzerain, the King of France, he fairly outstripped in 
power. 

Here then it will be well to pause and consider the 
character of the Conquest, and of William's policy to his 
newly acquired country. 




140 The Noj'mans in Europt 



CHAPTER XIII. 

WILLIAM'S POLICY TOWARDS THE CONQUERED 
COUNTRY. 

There were three classes in the country with whom 
Wilham had to deal, and these for convenience sake we 
will take in order. 

To understand the policy of the Conqueror towards 
the English, it is necessary to take a retrospect of their 
^, ^ ,. , constitutional history. Anglo-Saxon society, 

TheEnghsh. ,1 • it-ti^ 

by the time the English Conquest was com- 
pleted, consisted of four ranks. The eorl, or noble by 
Condition birth ; the ceorl, or free by birth ; the 
of English Iset, and the theow or slave. Of these the 
their first two former only were considered full free. 
The^eorr*^' '^^^ l^et was really an inferior ceorl, enjoying 
ceorl, personal freedom, but holding his land of 

some lord upon whom he was dependent. 
The theow or slave, a small unimportant class, consisted 
of those who had lost their liberty for debt or other 
causes. The two latter classes were probably, in the West 
of England at least, largely recruited from the conquered 
Kelts. The tribes thus constituted were commanded by 
The Ealdor- leaders who appear under different names. Of 
Hereto°-a thesc the ealdorman was the chief magistrate 
King. in times of peace, the heretoga the leader 

in war. In time these two offices were combined in 
one person under the name of cyning or king. 

The mark system, or custom of holding lands in com- 
mon, had nearly if not entirely passed away, and each 
Tenure of freeman had a right to a certain portion of 
land. land granted out to him after the conquest 

of the country, and called his ' allodial property.' This 



45 o- 1 o66. A nglo- Saxon Institutions. 141 

property, the possession of which was a necessary con- 
dition of full tribal membership, he held in full ownership 
without any rent or service, except those included in the 
term ' trinoda necessitas/ the requirements of which were 
to serve in the national militia, repair roads and bridges, 
and keep up the defences of the country. 

What remained after this allotment was called the 
folk-land, and this could not be granted out to any with- 
out the consent of the whole tribe given in its ' gemot ' or 
assembly. If so granted, it was termed 'boc-land,' or 
land booked out, and in that case the terms of tenure 
varied. 

The people settling down on these terms formed them- 
selves into political self-governing societies. Of these the 
unit was the towiiship, a rural division of -pj^^ ^oyNx\.- 
varying limits surrounded by the tun, or quick- ship. 
set hedge. A cluster of townships formed the hundred, 
and a cluster of hundreds the shire. Each of these had 
their separate courts. 

In the court of the township all the freemen of the 
township had a right to sit, and there their elected repre- 
sentative, the town reeve, settled their petty court of the 
disputes, collected their contributions to the township, 
revenue, and summoned the militia when necessary. 

In the court of the hundred the several townships of 
which the hundred was formed were represented by their 
parish priest, their reeve, the lords of lands, and {loMxt of the 
four elected men. Its presiding magistrate was hundred. 
the hundredman, elected in the Hundred court. But the 
judges were at first the whole body of the suitors, and sub- 
sequently a representative body of twelve men capable of 
declaring the law, who for convenience sake were en- 
trusted with the judicial business of the hundred. Here 
more important disputes were settled. Theoretically 
every suit began here, and an appeal lay to the. Shire 



142 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

court. The hundred-man led the hundred to the 
mihtia, and the hundred formed the basis of assessment 
for taxation. 

The shire was probably originally the sub-kingdom, 
and the shire court the court or ' gemot ' of that sub- 
The Shire kingdom. But as the separate kingdoms 
court. became united, the shire became a division of 

the kingdom, a collection of hundreds, and the Shire 
court the highest and most important of the local courts. 
Its suitors were the same as those of the Hundred courts 
which fell within the shire. Its officers were the eal- 
dorman, the sheriff (shire-reeve), and the bishop. Of 
these, the ealdorman represented the old sub-king, who, 
as the sub-kingdoms were gradually united, became a 
national officer. He was appointed by the king and 
Witenagemot, and had the command of the whole militia 
of the shire. The sheriff in practice was always nominated 
by the king, and was his judicial and fiscal officer, col- 
lecting the royal revenues and presiding in the court. 
The bishop, sitting with the other two, decided questions 
of ecclesiastical law. The judges, as was universally 
the case in these local courts, were not the officers, but 
all the suitors to the court — that is, all who had a right 
to sit there. Here, however, as in the Hundred court, 
the office of judges was subsequently limited to certain 
representative men, often twelve in number. 

The ecclesiastical divisions of the country nearly re- 
sembled the political. The parish was identical v/ith the 
township, the bishoprick with the shire ; and 

Ecclesiasti- . . 

cai organi- the ecclcsiastical and political organization 
zation. borrowed much from one another. 

It was in the Shire court that all important cases, 
civil and criminal, were decided. An appeal lay from 
the inferior courts to this court, while from the Shire 



450-1066. Anglo-Saxon Institutions. 143 

court the appeal lay to the king in the Witenagemot. 
In civil matters it settled disputes and jurisdictiou 
witnessed transfers of land. But the most of Shire 

f. . . . ,. . . court — J 

important part 01 its jurisdiction was the civil, 
criminal. ^""^"^^'• 

Let us then suppose the offender caught, and follow 
him to his trial. His judges, observe, are the freemen 
of the district, assembled in their own ^ folk- yiodz of 
moot,' or later, the twelve representative men. procedure. 
The ealdorman, sheriff, and bishop are only officers of 
the court ; they preside over it, and the sheriff sees the 
law executed, but they do not judge the accused. Here 
then, in the very origin of our history, we have the right 
of every Englishman to be tried by his peers. 

Now the accused might be presented for trial by the 
judgment of the Hundred court. In that case he was 
looked upon as one convicted by common opinion, and 
was judged accordingly. He might indeed appeal to the 
* ordeal,' a form of trial in which the accused, appealing 
to the judgment of God, walked across red-hot bars of 
iron or was thrown into water. But even here, if he 
escaped unhurt, he was still considered a bad character, 
and though relieved from greater punishment had to fly 
the realm. 

But next, he might be accused by a private indivi- 
dual. In that case he was allowed to bring witnesses 
called ^ compurgators,' people who swore to the truth 
of his oath and thus attested the respectable character 
of the accused, and purged him from the imputations 
cast upon him. Now, if the accused could bring 
enough of those compurgators to balance the evidence of 
the other side, he would be acquitted, and, in considering 
the question, the popular judges estimated the weight of 
each compurgator by his rank. Thus an eorl's word 



144 ^^^^ Normans in Europe. a.d. 

would be as valuable as that of six ceorls, and an earldor- 
man's evidence might outweigh that of a whole town- 
ship. 

No doubt this was a rough and ready way of adminis- 
tering justice, and there may have been a temptation to 
get rid by this means of an unpopular man ; but, at least, 
the question of guilt or innocence was left to those who 
were most likely to know the probabilities of the case 
from a man's antecedents. 

Finally, if a man could not bring sufficient compur- 
gation, he might go to the ordeal, and if he passed that 
safely would be considered acquitted by the direct inter- 
position of God. 

Punishment generally took the form of pecuniary 
fines, that of death being unknown except in cases of 
Punish- treason, sacrilege, witchcraft, and theft where 

merits. the thief was caught in the act. Injury to life 

and limb was compounded for by the wer-gild, paid 
to the injured man, or to his family in case of death, 
and the wiht-geld, or fine to the state. The wer-gild 
of each man was arranged on a sliding scale according 
to his rank — that of an eorl being greater than that 
of a ceorl, and so on. 

The system of police bore the same local character 
which we have seen so strongly developed in the Anglo- 
Saxon institutions. It was based upon the 

Police. . 

idea of mutual responsibility. For this pur- 
pose the hundreds were divided into tithings, and by a 
Frank- ^'^'^. ^^ Canute's everyone was bound to belong 

pledge. to a tithing, while by the laws of Edgar every 

landless man was forced to have a lord to answer for 
him in the courts, and every man a surety to answer for 
him if he were absent when required. 

Such was the local and judicial organization of the 
Anglo-Saxon institutions in their earliest form. But 



450-I066. Anglo-Saxon Instittitions. 145 

before the Norman Conquest several modifications had 
occurred. These will best be summed up under the 
heads — (t) Growth of thaneship ; (2) Rise of territorial 
jurisdiction ; (3) Growth of towns or burghs. 

(i) Growth of Thaneship. — Side by side with the de- 
mocratic constitution of all German tribes, there had 
existed a peculiar institution known as the Comitatus. 
Each ealdorman or king was allowed to collect around 
him a body of personal followers called his gesiths, or 
his thanes ; representing a condition of things not 
unlike that described in the Homeric poems, where each 
chief has a following of personal attendants called his 
iroLpoL or companions. These warriors were bound to 
cheir lord by the closest ties of personal dependence, 
and after the conquest received grants, either from the 
undivided ' folk-land ' which remained over after the 
freemen had received their share, or on the domains of the 
ealdorman or king. These thanes might be ceorls or 
eorls themselves, holding lands of their own, or might 
have no freehold of their own ; in either case they were 
at first looked upon as an inferior class by the indepen- 
dent eorls and ceorls. But in time, as the power of the king 
increased, they began to borrow dignity from his advance. 
In times of war such nobles by service, forming chiefly a 
military class, became the natural leaders. Their privileges 
too were increased by the royal grants. From The thanes 
them the king chose his officers, his ealdor- supersede 

° . ' - the older 

men, sheriffs, and even bishops ; and thus a ranks. 
class of nobility by service arose, which in the end super- 
seded entirely the nobility by birth. 

The custom once begun, eorls and ceorls pressed into 
the service of the king. The ealdorman, nowfallir.g back 
into a national officer, surrounded himself with thanes, 
and the bishop's and king's thanes followed suit. Then 
the eorls and ceorls, abandoning their independence, which 

M. H. L 



146 The Normans in Europe. 

day by day became more precarious, made haste to com- 
mend themselves to some lord, and in return for the com- 
mendation received the benefit of security. 

Meanwhile, a property qualification became an essen- 
tial requirement for the position of a thane, who thus 
assumed a territorial rather than a personal cha- 
racter. 

Finally, under Athelstan the principle of lordship 
became compulsory. Everyone was bound to attach 
Thaneship himself to some lord, and the lordless man 
gains a was looked upon as an outlaw, 

character Under thcse influences the classes of eorl 

comes^com- ^'^^ ceorl entirely passed away. The class of 
pulsory. eorls merged in that of thane, a term which 

now became equivalent to noble or gentle, while the 
ceorls either became thanes or were degraded into a 
semi-servile class. 

Thus thaneship, at the time of the Norman Conquest, 
had become the central institution of the state, and 
the twofold rank of eorl and ceorl was lost in that of thane. 

(2) Rise of Territorial Jurisdiction. — At the first settle- 
ment of the English, the greater lords had enjoyed in some 
cases independent jurisdiction. That is to say, where a 
township lay on their property, although the constitution 
was the same as in the free township, the reeve was ap- 
pointed by them, and they enjoyed the privileges and un- 
dertook the duties which elsewhere belonged to the free^ 
holders. Such townships virtually formed manors, though 
the name itself is of Norman origin ; and as the principle 
of thaneship grew, these jurisdictions increased, partly by 
royal grants, partly by commendation of whole townships 
to a neighbouring thane. Gradually by the grant of 
' sac ' (jurisdiction in matters of dispute), and ' soc ' 
(the right of holding courts for their personal and territo- 
rial dependants), the thanes gained exemption from the 



450-I066. Anglo-Saxon Institutions. 147 

jurisdiction of the Hundred court, though still subject to 
that of the Shire, and the payments formerly due to the 
Hundred court were now made to the thane. Thus their 
territorial jurisdiction rapidly increased, and the idea of 
possession of land and jurisdiction went hand in hand ; 
these private jurisdictions encroaching largely upon the 
popular courts. 

Meanwhile the jurisdiction of the king increased. From 
being merely the hearer of appeals in the Witenagemot he 
began to be looked upon, as the origin of all 

_, , - , , , Growth of 

justice. The number 01 pleas reserved to the royal juris- 
crown ('crown pleas') increased, and these Miction. 
were judged by the royal officers in the local courts. 

Lastly, about the time of Canute, the king in some 
cases delegated his powers to some great land-owner, who 
thus became the superior judicial officer in his district, 
superintended the popular courts, and usurped their 
rights. 

From all these causes the lower popular courts of 
township and hundred decreased in influence, while the 
manorial courts became more and more important, and 
threatened, at the time of the Norman Conquest, soon tc 
supersede them entirely. 

(3) Growth of Burghs. — The growth of burghs tended 
to the same end. Originally the Anglo-Saxons were not 
fond of municipal life, and neglected any remains of 
Roman organisation which may have survived among 
the British after the Roman occupation, the township, it 
must be remembered, being in no sense a town as we 
should call it, but a rural subdivision of the free commu- 
nity. But in time the villages grew; the smaller 'burhs ' 
became a kind of civic township, with their borough- 
moot corresponding to the rural township court ; the 
larger, comprising a collection of townships, each with 
their separate borough-moot, gained an organization 



148 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

similar to that of the hundred, with their Ward-mote or 
civic Hundred court. 

These larger towns, standing apart from the neigh- 
bouring hundred, would enjoy certain rights of jurisdiction 
independent of the Hundred but subject to the Shire 
court, and in some cases paid a composition by which 
they gained immunity from arbitrary exactions. 

By the time of the Conquest, therefore, there existed 
the court of the township, manorial courts, and the 
Local courts borougli courts ; above these the Hundred 
at time of court, from the jurisdiction of which the two 

Norman ' •' 

Conquest. latter had, perhaps, to some extent emanci- 
pated themselves ; and above all, the Shire court, to which 
they all were subject and to which the appeal lay. 

The local government stopped at the Shire court, the 
central was entrusted to the Witenagemot. The insti- 
The Witen- tution of this assembly is probably due to a 
agemot. somcwhat later date, after the kingdom had 

been consolidated and the power of the king established. 
It was therefore the creation of royalty, and not a re- 
presentative assembly. On great occasions, indeed, the 
Witenagemot was attended by a concourse of people, 
to whom its decision was announced, and who, by their 
applause, were supposed to give the national assent. 
But none had any right to sit, or enjoyed any deliberative 
vote, except the counsellors of the king, the bishops, the 
ealdormen, and some of the greater or king's thanes. 

The powers assumed by this body were, in theory at 
least, very extensive. It was the supreme legislative and 
deliberative assembly of the kingdom, and 
s powers. ^^^ court of final appeal in judicial mat- 
ters. With the king it could do anything, and with- 
out it nothing of importance could be done. The king, 
with its counsel and consent, passed laws ecclesiastical 
as well as civil, levied taxes, made grants out of the folk- 



450-1066. Anglo-Saxon histitutions, 149 

land, deliberated on peace or war, elected bishops and 
ealdormen, and carried on the whole machinery of 
government. It even claimed and exercised the right of 
electing and deposing the king, though the election was 
by custom confined to the royal family, with a presump- 
tion in favour of the representative of the eldest branch, 
if of fit age and character to govern, and, in later times 
at least, the nomination of the dying king was held to 
have considerable weight. Still, in the exceptional cases 
of Canute and his sons Harold Harefoot and Harthacnut, 
and of Harold, the Wi tan even departed from the royal hne. 

The constitutional fabric was crowned by the king 
himself. From the position of mere leader of his tribe 
in peace and war, the representative of his 
people, he had, by the gradual consolidation of Growth of 
the kingdoms into one, gained a constitutional ^^ power. 
and territorial position. He was no longer king of the 
West Saxons, but king of England. He enjoyed con- 
siderable revenues, and had a large private demesne, 
which in those days, when the expenses of government 
were small owing to the development of local organisa- 
tion, made him almost entirely independent of the Witan 
for money. 

He was the supreme executive ofHcer of the realm, 
and all paid him personal allegiance, while in his circuits 
he superseded by his presence the powers of all the local 
courts. Moreover, as we draw near the Norman Con- 
quest, we find his powers steadily increasing. The Witan 
daily became a narrower body, more and more the mere 
officers of royalty, before which their powers faded. 

The ' folk-land ' was now considered as the king's royal 
demesne, and practically he disposed of it as he would. 
The growth of thaneship added to his personal influence. 
His jurisdiction grew by the multiplication of pleas of 
the crown and by the extension of the idea that all 



150 The Normans m Europe. a.d. 

offences were violations of his (the king's) peace, and 
with the development of the territorial idea he gradually 
became the lord of his people and their land. 

The question now arises, Did feudalism exist in 
England before the Norman Conquest ? From this 
How far sketch it will be seen that many of its germs 

ex^sted^in ^^ least were there. The personal tie was to 
England be found in the relation of lord to thane, and 

anterior to , . i • i i • n 

the Norman the thane paid service to his lord, especially 
Personaf tie ^^^ ' hcriot,' or gift of the best horse or suit of 
complete. armour on his death. Even land was some- 
times held on the terms of military service. 

The possession of land had become a necessary 
qualification for nobility and freedom. Territorial juris- 
^, . . , diction had in many cases arisen, and the 

lerritonal ^ 

tie fast manorial courts were very similar to those of 

ansmg. ^^ feudal System, while the king had become 

the lord of the land of the nation. 

But Continental feudalism had not as yet arisen. 
Continental feudalism has been defined as ' a complete 
organization of society through the medium of land- 
tenure, in which from the king to the landowner all are 
bound together by obligation of service and defence.' 
Government and jurisdiction were based upon this 
system, and whilst the lord exercised jurisdiction over 
his tenants he was considered the lord of the land which 
they held of him. 

Hence the main distinction between that system and 

the Anglo-Saxon lay in these points, (i) Although when 

Canute divided England into four great earl- 

Distlnctlon i i • i i • •^ 

between doms he mtroduced a system very similar to 

Saxon' and feudal government, feudal government proper 
Continental never existed. The official magistrates had not 
become entirely hereditary. The ealdorman 
did notenjoyfiscaljlegislative, and judicial independence as 



io66. Anglo-Saxon Institutions. 151 

the feudal nobles did abroad. The local courts of the shire, 
hundred, and township still existed, and the former were 
supreme even over manorial courts within the shire. 
Nor was the central government organized on feudal 
principles, nor the Witenagemot in any sense a feudal court. 
(2) Although the personal tie was there, the real one was 
not ; that is, the land had not become the tie or bond 
between the kmg and his people or between lord and 
thane. Though all were obliged to have some lord, they 
could choose their lord, and if they held lands of him 
this did not form the tie between them, but the personal 
commendation ; and many held no land of their lord, 
but possessed lands of their own. Lastly, many land- 
owners enjoyed territorial jurisdiction, but it extended 
over men whose lands were in no sense held of them. 

But if feudalism did not exist, it was on the point of 
arising, and but for the Norman Conquest would probably 
have been developed as it was abroad. 

Such were the institutions of the people over whom 
William had been elected king. William, it must be 
remembered, did not claim his tide to the 
throne by conquest. The attitude assumed poiicyTo- 
by him was that of the lawful claimant to ^^""ds the 

•^ Anglo- 

the throne, who, finding himself unjustly Saxons, 
ousted by the perjured usurper Harold, had the position 
appealed to the judgment of God on the battle- °^ lawful 

^^ . successor of 

field of Hastings, and there asserted the right- Edward the 
fulness of his cause. It was under this pretext 
that he had gained the moral support of Europe and the 
blessing of the Pope, and after the battle he had referred 
the matter to the Witan, who had freely elected him as 
king. On this election primarily he based his right. 
He styled himself the successor of Edward the Con- 
fessor, and the name of Harold was omitted, as that of a 
usurper. 



152 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

He had, therefore, neither the opportunity nor the 
He con- incHnation entirely to overthrow the nation- 

tinues the t r i i • • 

Anglo- ahty 01 the country or to destroy its time- 

Saxon m- honoured institutions, but in theory became as 

stitutions, ' -' _ _ 

and adapts truly a national king as Canute. It was in this 
those spirit that he devoted himself to the task 

f'^^^^N which lay before him of adapting the institu- 

mandy. tions of his ncwly-won country to those which 

he brought from Normandy, and to the altered circum- 
stances of the -times. And it is in this work that the 
political genius of William and his truly Norman powers 
of adaptation are forcibly illustrated. 

From the preceding sketch the weakness and strength 
of the Anglo-Saxon institutions will be understood. Their 
Weakness Strength lay clearly in their local and social 
and strength aspect ; in the development of the lower grades 
^axon of constitutional life ; in the healthy local self- 

mstuutions. government found in the organisation of the 
shire, the hundred, the township, and the borough ; in 
the popular character of their justice ; and in their self- 
dependence, their quiet and peace-loving character. 

In all this they were strong ; but in the higher ranges 
of constitutional life they failed. The connexion between 
the local self-governing communities and the central 
government was feeble. The administrative machinery 
by which the king might maintain the superintendence 
and carry on the central government was inadequate and 
ill-arranged. The relation between the local courts of 
justice and that of the king, who held a general super- 
intendence over them, and to whom lay the ultimate ap- 
peal, was ill-defined. 

This William clearly saw, and he acted accordingly. 
The local courts were preserved intact, and the English 
language was allowed there. The number of manorial 
courts was increased by royal grant, but no other change 



I070- 87- Willia7ns Policy. 153 

was made. No difference was made in the local adminis- 
tration of justice except that the trial by com- -vviiiiam 
bat was added to the compurgation and ordeal continues 
for the use of Normans. The privileges of juHsdic- 
towns were left untouched, and those of ^^°"^' 
London confirmed by royal charter. 

The system of mutual responsibility was extended in 
the system of frankpledge, by which the police arrange- 
ments were carried out by sections of ten men, mutually 
responsible for each other. 

The militia system was continued, and the ' trinoda 
necessitas ' maintained. 

So far, Wilham acted as an English king and per- 
petuated national institutions. But in the 
relations between the central government and tions in the 
the king many modifications were introduced. ^^^^^^ ^f 
The Witenagemot was continued indeed, but govern- 
turned into a feudal court, the ' Commune "^^'^ ' 
Concilium' of the Norman kings, in which the members 
sat as feudal lords. A sort of committee of this, the ' Curia 
Regis,' was established, which, besides its 
character as a council of deliberation and gemo't^be- 
leffislation, formed the court of ultimate ap- comes the 

° ' - _ . Commune 

peal, in some cases a court of first instance, Concilium. 
and kept the local courts in order. Of this "'^^^ ^^^^' 
court the presiding officer was the Justiciary, an officer of 
purely foreign origin. For the full development of his 
powers we must wait till the reign of Henry I., but under 
William he was generally the regent of the kingdom in 
the king's absence, and probably soon began to assume 
his later position of supreme judicial and financial officer 
of the realm. 

The government of the shires was entrusted to earls, 
the successors of the old ealdormen. But William 
avoided the fault of Canute. He did not carve out 



154 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

England into great earldoms ; he confined his earldoms to 
Appoint- one shire, and was careful, with a few excep- 
earis over tions to be mentioned hereafter, to keep the 
the shires. earls in due subordination to himself, and to 
render them more entirely an official class. 

The sheriffs, too, were made rnore dependent on the 
king, and became his representatives in all fiscal matters, 
thus binding the local courts and local organization to 
the central government, and preventing undue indepen- 
Sheriffs dencc from arising. These reforms did not, 

niademore indeed, arrive at their perfect form till the 
on the reign of Henry I. and Henry II., nor had 

'^i"s- William, a man of war, troubled as he was by 

continual disturbances, time fully to complete his schemes. 
But he introduced the germ of the future Anglo-Norman 
government ; and by preserving what was strongest in the 
Anglo-Saxon system, and strengthening what was weak by 
new elements, by his stern will he welded the two into a 
compact whole, with all the elements of stability. And to 
this day these two elements lie side by side, each betray- 
ing their origin and attesting the political wisdom of 
William : the local organization emanating from the 
English people, the administrative and financial system 
centred round the Norman king. 

To the lowest classes, indeed, the Norman Conquest 
was a boon. The Normans, unaccustomed to actual 
slavery, confused the lower classes in the common 
Effect of class of ' villeins ' or ' servi.' The latter pro- 
Norman bably represented the Anglo-Saxon 'theows' 
lower and the landless ' ceorls,' and seem to have 
classes. held the position of landless labourers. The 
former were chiefly formed of those ' ceorls ' who before 
the Conquest had failed to rise to the rank of thanes, 
and had fallen into a semi-servile class. The position of 
the ' villeins ^ seems to have been far better now than it 



1070-87. William's Policy, 155 

became later. If they might not leave the land without the 
lord's consent, they were at least safe in the possession of 
their homes. They had to till the soil of his demesne, but 
had a remedy against the violence of their master. The 
servus and villein alike might be manumitted by the 
Church, and at a later date, if they could escape to a town 
and live there as members of a guild for a year and a day, 
they were held to have earned their freedom. But to 
the higher and middle classes it was different. Although 
the Anglo-Saxons were still allowed to enjoy their time- 
honoured institutions and customs, and the policy of 
William was conciliatory, their condition was g^^ ^^11 
not a happy one. Their laws and language, heavily on 

n 1 r ^ '^he imddle 

mdeed, were not swept away by any formal and higher 
legislative enactments, but in the hands of ^^^*^^- 
Norman officers the spirit of legal administration was 
changed, the English ceased to be the court language, and 
the country was, as we shall see, gradually feudalised. 
The Chronicles do not complain of suppressed nation- 
ality, but are full of the legal and fiscal oppression : 
'■ The king was so stark, and took of his subjects many 
marks of gold and more of silver.^ 

William, after the first submission of England, affected, 
and probably intended, to rule mildly and mercifully. 
But the constant rebellions which subsequently broke out 
brought out the sternness and indifference to suffering 
which stain his character. The whole country between 
Tees and Humber was reduced to a perfect waste, and 
for nine years was entirely untilled. The depopulation 
which went on is clearly seen from the records of Domes- 
day Book. Thus, Oxford, in the Confessor's time, had 
721 houses; in William's only 243. York under the 
former contained 1,607 5 under the latter only 967. 

The confiscations, at first confined to those who had 
actually fought at Hastings, rapidly increased, and at the 



156 The Normans in Europe. a. d. 

end of the reign there were no Anglo-Saxon earls, only one 
Anglo-Saxon bishop, and a few abbots and great land- 
owners remaining. The people saw their wealth and 
offices transferred to Norman barons, and groaned under 
their cruelty and oppression. Their country became only 
a part, and that not the most important part, of al 
Norman kingdom, and her interests were continually 
sacrificed to those of Normandy. Her king was more 
often abroad than in England, while in his absence the 
The Nor- Normans ground down the people. In every 
man Con- way they suffered much, yet it was the hap- 
ma^eiya^ piest thing for England in the end. .Vwhen we 
England* remember the want of combined action and 
It strength- political Unity which marked the preceding, 
history of England, when we remember the 
power of the two great families of Leofric and Siward, 
and the independence of Northumbria and the jealousy 
with which Edwin and Morkar looked upon the as- 
cendency of Harold, we must allow that had he suc- 
ceeded quietly and transmitted his crown to his succes- 
sors, he would have enjoyed only a partial supremacy 
over a large part of the country. His position was not 
unlike that of Hugh Capet, first king of France, and 
probably, as in France, the earls would long have main- 
tained their independence. Continental feudalism, too, 
all the elements of which we have seen existed in England, 
would probably have arisen with its anarchy, isolation, 
and class privileges, and the condition of England might 
soon have resembled that of France. Far better for her 
was it that she should be conquered and reduced to sub- 
mission and unity, even by the cruel hands of the Norman 
kings. Far better was it that she should suffer a tem- 
porary overthrow of her national being. For thus she 
gained what was wanting in her own political condition ; 
the growth of feudalism was checked, and after a century 



1070-87. William's Policy. 157 

or so of compression and pruning which, though severe, 
was necessary for future growth, all that was valuable in 
the Anglo-Saxon institutions reasserted itself and became 
the primary basis of our later constitution. We should 
remember, too, that by the Conquest England was brought 
into far closer contact with the Continent, and this, 
too, at an important epoch. This was clearly 
for the good of England. The Anglo-Saxon, her with 
as is well illustrated by the character of his Europe. 
historical literature, had no European sympathies, hardly 
any Enghsh imperial ones. His interest, his sympathies 
were entirely local. He had no sense of a common 
brotherhood of men, a commonwealth of nations. He set 
little value on things removed from his own personal 
observation, and his ideas were thus essentially narrow 
and confined. By the Norman Conquest all this was 
changed. England, becoming as she did part of an Anglo- 
Norman kingdom, was forced to embrace wider sym- 
pathies, began to feel herself really a member of Europe, 
and thus lost that narrowness and exclusiveness which 
so clearly marks her earlier history. 

Lastly, the Anglo-Saxon character, institutions, and 
social life seem to have required some new infusion of 
bloody and this the Normans gave. The Anglo-Saxon 
character seems to have had all the characteristics of 
stability, but not of advance ; of solidity, but not of 
sprightliness. It required the Norman element, deeply 
influenced as it was by the French character, to give the 
necessary life and vigour, and without the Normans, as 
it has been well said, ' England would have been me- 
chanical, not artistic ; brave, not chivalrous ; the home of 
learning, not of thought.' In no long time the two 
peoples began to amalgamate, and a healthy, strong, 
and vigorous people was the result, uniting the strength of 
the Norman and Anglo-Saxon characters, which soon be- 



158 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

gan to multiply more rapidly than other European nations, 
and which now has spread to every part of the inhabited 
globe. 

In spite, then, of the temporary misery which England 
must have undergone, although we naturally lament over 
the fall of Harold, the king of the Anglo-Saxons, as a 
national loss, and over Hastings as a national defeat, 
we can but acknowledge that the Norman Conquest was 
a necessary and beneficial experience in our history, from 
which, as far as we can see, the greatest benefits have 
flowed. 

The advantages which England gained by the 
p ,. ^ Norman Conquest will further appear from a 
William rcview of the policy of William towards the 

towards the , , 1 i 

Norman Norman nobles. 

barons. "Y\v<e. Norman nobles had been induced to 

aid William in his invasion by promises of wealth and 
power, and these promises had now to be fulfilled. They 
had no reason to complain. The confiscated estates of 
the conquered were largely conferred upon them, and their 
manors were granted to them with exemption from the 
jurisdiction of thfe Hundred court. They practically 
monopohsed all the important offices of state. They 
also enjoved the position of counsellors of the king. So 
far WilUam satisfied their claims. But they had been 
accustomed to a feudal form of government, with its 
anarchy and independence, and many of them longed, 
no doubt, to become great feudal lords in England. 

Thus William was brought face to face with the ques- 
tion : how far should he introduce Continental feudalism 
into England ? 

In examining his pohcy in this respect, it will be well 
to consider feudalism again under its twofold divisions — 
(i) a system of land-tenure, (2) a system of government. 

To the feudal system of land-tenure William had been 



1070-87. William's Policy. 159 

long accustomed, and to it there was no objection. Con- 
sequently, all the lands which were confiscated from the 
Anglo-Saxons were granted out to his Normans on feudal 
terms, and became ' feudal manors/ and the ' folk-land ' 
was turned absolutely into crown property. The Anglo- 
Saxon landowners still held their lands bv 

, , , , . . , ', He intro- 

their old tenure ; but owmg to the repeated duces the 
revolts, few of these remained at the end of ^^^^f^ of 
William's reign, and those few, following the land tenure 
now almost universal custom, either made 
terms with the king himself or with some neighbouring 
lord, and consented to hold their lands as feudal vassals. 

Thus, by a gradual process, the feudal tenure of land 
became universal in England, and was worked up into a 
system by the Norman lawyers. 

But with the government of the country the case was 
different. William had seen the evil results of the Conti- 
nental system, the anarchy, the isolation, the weakening 
of the royal authority which it produced, and was deter- 
mined to prevent this in England. Accord- ^^^ checks 
ingly, in his grants to his Norman nobles he the feudal 

r -\ ••T-/-1-/-1 indepen- 

refused to carve out principalities for his fol- dence of 
lowers. He gave them manors scattered over ^^^ barons. 
England ; and, while allowing them the right of jurisdic- 
tion in their manors, he strictly limited their powers, in 
most cases by the appeal to the Hundred court, in all by 
direct appeal to himself, and kept them in due subordi- 
nation by his royal processes or circuits (cf. p. 229). The 
earls were only set over single shires, and the growth of 
independence thereby checked. The great lords were al- 
lowed no independent rights of coining, nor of making 
laws ; all these matters being reserved to the king himself. 
Exceptions indeed were made. The four paiatine 
Counties Palatine — Chester, under Hugh Lu- earldoms, 
pus ; Shrewsbury, under Roger Montgomery ; Durham, 



i6o The Nor^nans in Europe. a.d. 

and Kent, were erected, in which the governors enjoyed 
rights very similar to those of the feudal barons abroad. 
Of these the earldom of Chester was the most important, 
and may be taken as type of the rest, though it enjoyed 
greater rights than any other. The Earl of Chester 
was lord of all the land in the shire except 
that in the hands of the bishop. He had a 
council of the barons in the Palatinate, his own judicial 
courts, his own staff of judges, constable, steward, and 
other officers. Offences were said to be done against his 
peace and not that of the king, and all acts were in his 
name. In fact, he was feudal sovereign of Cheshire, as 
the King of England was in Normandy. So entirely did 
the Palatine jurisdictions stand apart from the rest of 
England, that those of Chester and Durham, the only 
two which survived the Conqueror's reign, were not re- 
presented in the national Parliament till the reigns of 
Henry VIII. and Charles II. respectively, while that of 
Durham retained its independent courts till 1836. 

These Counties Palatine were so granted because 
they formed the outposts against danger from without : 
Shrewsbury and Chester against the Welsh ; Durham 
against the Scots ; and Kent against invasion from the 
Continent. Here great centralisation and authority were 
required against surprise. But even here the political 
foresight of the Conqueror did not forsake him. ^ Two of 
these, Durham and Kent, were granted to ecclesiastics, 
whereby they were prevented from becoming hereditary, 
and that of Kent was not revived after the fall of Odo 
of Bayeux. 

Lastly, in 1086, taking advantage of a threatened 
invasion from Norway, William made every landowner in 
England take an oath of homage to him i7nine- 
homage, dtately, instead of demanding it only of his 

^°^^- ' tenants-in-chief,' who, in their turn, might 

exact it from their own tenants. By this act he destroyed 



1070-87. Williams Policy, 161 

the essence of feudal government, which consisted in 
the gradation of ranks one beneath the other, the lowest 
holding of that immediately above and responsible to 
that alone ; the ' tenants-in-chief,' or those who held of 
the king himself, being alone responsible to him. 

Thus, while elsewhere a vassal was bound to follow his 
immediate lord even when rebelling against the king, and 
could not be punished for so doing, in England everyone 
who took arms against the king was held guilty of treason. 

In this policy William was largely aided by the insu- 
lar position of England, and by the comparatively small 
extent of the kingdom. By the former, the wiUiam 
factious nobles were prevented from speedily ^i<^?<^ i" his 

.. . . ,.,. , antifeudal 

gammg assistance agamst their king as they policy by 
did abroad. By the latter, centralisation of posUbn of 
government was rendered easy, and the cen- England, 
trifugal tendencies of the times checked. 

Thus, in the government of England, the balance of 
power lay clearly on the side of the king; while in France 
this was destroyed in favour of the baronage. But the 
French view was taken by the Norman barons ; and 
after WiUiam had crushed out the local resistance of the 
Saxons, he had to meet with the rebellions of his feudal 
vassals in Normandy and England. 

The results of the policy of William are among the 
most important facts of early English history, and we 
may fairly say that it is to William in no little 
degree that we are indebted for our later con- William's 
stitutional government. Not that he in any way P°^icy. 
anticipated, or could have anticipated it, nor that, had he 
done so, he would have welcomed the prospect, but he 
was in this matter what most men are after all, the ser- 
vants of a Master they cannot resist. It would seem that 
every nation in the course of its development must pass 
through a stage, a period of absolutism, more or less 

M. H, M 



1 62 1 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

declared. Such a schooling is necessary to break down 
the independence and privileges of the nobility, to fuse 
races and classes together, and to give them common in- 
terests and common sympathies for which they in turn 
may struggle against the sovereign's will. This schooling 
England underwent under the stern rule of her Anglo- 
Norman kings ; while France, sacrificed as she was to 
the anarchy of feudalism, put off her schooling till late, 
when it became doubly oppressive, in fact, a tyranny. 

Again, society must first develope a strong, healthy, 
legal system before she can advance to anything like real 
and practical freedom. Without such a system to rally 
round, liberty becomes anarchy, equality a contradiction 
in terms, since equality before the law is the only one 
that can exist, and without law equality is sacrificed to 
the might of the strongest. This, again, the strong rule 
of the Anglo-Norman kings gave to England, whereas in 
France it did not grow up till late, then only to add still 
further links to the chain of absolute and irresponsible 
despotism. 

Let us, keeping these two points in view, try and trace 
the different results of feudalism in England and France. 
Different ^^ France the independence of the feuda- 
results of torics from the crown was practically all but 

Feudalism . , , , . ^ 

in England Complete. 1 he nation resembled m fact 
and France, j-g-ther a Confederacy of independent princes 
than a united nation under one king. These feudal 
princes enjoyed all or nearly all royal rights, and, 
proud of their independence, affected to despise their 
weak over-lord at Paris. Trusting to their own great 
power, they refused to unite, except in a fitful way, with 
one another, and caring nothing for the classes below 
them, divided their lands among a host of inferior barons 
who might assist them against their king, and who joined 
with them in grinding down the lower classes. Hence 



1070-87. William- s Policy. 1.63 

arose isolation in every form. Isolation of one part of 
France from the other, which checked the growth of 
national unity. Isolation amongst the nobles, which 
eventually comtributed to their fall. Isolation between 
classes, military and non-military, which prevented any 
union. Law, too, never for years attained to the position 
of any real system. One half of France was called 'le 
pays du droit coutumier/ clearly showing the absence 
of any definite system, and- in the rest of France, ' le 
pays du droit ecrit,' the law was continually being 
evaded, altered, and destroyed by the anarchy which ex- 
isted. Hence in France we see an utter absence of 
cohesion, an utter want of community of interests between 
all classes and all parts of the country. On this and out 
of this rose the power of the crown. Itself the only 
organised power, it slowly but surely broke in upon the 
anarchy. The independent feudatories, prevented' by 
their jealousy from uniting against the common foe, were 
either subdued or absorbed in detail. The people, 
seeking in the growth of the kingly power a defence 
from their hated over-lords, joined the king, and while 
they contributed materially to the consolidation of his 
power, omitted, in their hot haste, to secure themselves 
against future extravagances of prerogative. When then 
under Louis XIV. the crown had absorbed all the in- 
dependent principalities, and the political influence of 
the nobles was gone, nothing remained to stay its des- 
potism except the social privileges of the nobles, which 
rendered them hated while they were not feared, and led 
to their eventual overthrow. 

From this England was saved by the wise policy of 
William. The nobles, deprived of their independence 
at the time of the Conquest, struggled hard against their 
masters, rebelled continually, though without success, 
under William I., Rufus, and Henry I,, who were thus 



164 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

forced in some measure to unite with the nation against them. 
Overthrowing the central authority, they triumphed for a 
short time under Stephen, but, absolutely, defoated under 
Henry II., were obliged to change their tactics. They 
now sought alliance with the classes below them, made 
common cause with them, and at their head marched 
forth, under John and Henry III., to wrest constitutional 
and national privileges from an overgrown prerogative, 
and to lay the basis of a free and limited government 
in which the interests of the whole nation were considered. 
Hence in England no great gulf existed between classes, 
between the military or noble and the non-military or 
ignoble. There was no difference in the eyes of the law 
between noble and commoner. A few privileges the 
nobles had, but none in anyway onerous to the rest of the 
community, such as exemption from taxes, as in France. 
They had to seek for this power by showing themselves 
worthy leaders of a great constitutional cause, by be- 
coming the leading statesmen of the day, and winning 
the respect if not always the love of the classes below 
them, who for a long time looked to them as their natural 
leaders against the king. While thus England was ruled 
by an aristocracy, it was an aristocracy which claimed 
no irksome privileges, and which in some measure repre- 
sented the interests of the nation. 

Again, of all aristocracies ours is the least exclusive 
and the most democratic. It is constantly receiving new 
members from the commonalty, whilst its younger 
branches are continually sinking into the ranks of the 
commonalty. Abroad all the sons of a noble belong to 
the nobility; in England only the eldest son succeeds 
to the political privileges of his father, and the rest, with 
some slight social privileges, are counted as members of 
the commons. . Thus the nobility and commonalty are 



io';0-87. William's Policy. 165 

welded together, and there is no broad line of division 
between the two, as is the case abroad. 

The whole nation, presenting a common resistance to 
arbitrary power, gradually encroached upon the irrespon- 
sible prerogative of its kings, and vindicated for itself 
national privileges ; and England having early passed 
her schooling days, started forth into vigorous manhood, 
receiving one valuable legacy at least from the hand of 
her stern schoolmaster, a thoroughly organised and fully 
developed system of law, which might form the principle 
round which to rally and save her from the ills of anarchy 
and disunion. 

This is the course of English history, and many of its 
peculiarities may be derived from the fact that feudalism 
was introduced in so modified a form by William the 
Conqueror. To sum up what has been said.^ In Francfe 
the crown began in weakness and ended in despotism. 
In England it began in strength and ended in a limited 
monarchy. 

The importance of ecclesiastical history in early times 
is very great. The ecclesiastics were not only the spiri- 
tual teachers of the people, the moral, social, importance 
and educational organisers of society : they of ecclesi- 

, , , 1 T 1 astical his- 

were the statesmen, the lawyers, the diploma- tory in early 
tists, the writers, architects, even sometimes ^^™^^- 
the warriors of the times. The Church was the real 
avenue to power and influence in every department of 
intellectual life, the only avenue for poor but able men. 
Elsewhere the path was hedged up by the privileges of 
an aristocracy ; here they found scope for their genius 
and ambition, and rose with rapid strides by mere force 
of mind to the highest positions of the state. When to 
this is added the influence of the monasteries, which has 
already been mentioned, it will be clear that there was ab- 



1 66 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

solutely no department of active life which the Church did 
not interpenetrate and in which churchmen did not take 
the lead. The Church was ' an all-pervading and animating 
energy, quickening the whole social and political system, 
and formed the intellectual starting-point of the age.' 

It was therefore most necessary that William should 
turn his attention to the improvement of the Anglo-Saxon 
William and Church. Much moreovcr was needed. At the 
the Church. |-jj^g ^f ^^ Norman Conquest, the Anglo- 
Saxon Church, after having contributed not a httle to the 
Degraded growth of national unity, and given its aid 
condition of in the local Organisation of the countrv, had 

the Church f i i 

at accession lallen somewhat behmd the standard of 
of William, ^j^g ^-j^g^ ^j^g discipline, the morals, and 
the intelligence of the secular clergy had been re- 
laxed ; most of them were married, contrary to the 
opinions of those days, and there was even danger of 
their becoming a close hereditary caste, holding their 
possessions as so much family property descending from 
father to son, and thereby forgetting the trust character 
of the Church's revenues. It had been mainly with the 
view of reforming the English Church and drawing it 
closer to Rome that the Pope had sanctioned the ex- 
Wiiiiam pedition of William. The question was, how 

feform'lhe ^^r would William comply .? 
Church. To Understand clearly the meaning of Wil- 

liam's reforms in this respect, it is necessary to say a 
Scheme of few words on the great ecclesiastical system 
GregoryVii. ^f Gregory VII., who at this time sat on the 
papal throne. 

Feudalism, the first definite scheme after the fall of 
the empire of Charlemagne for organising political 
society, had hopelessly failed. The only possible means 
by which it could have succeeded was by maintain^ 
ing intact the mutual duties of over-lord, under-lord, 



1070-87. Williairis Ecclesiastical Policy. 167 

vassal, and villein. These once destroyed, feudalism 
became a mere excuse for perpetual quarrels Failure of 
between the barons and for intolerable op- feudalism 
pression of the despised non-military classes, ciple of 
All cohesion in the European state- system organization 
was destroyed, and society and government, except under 
the temporary rule of some great man, were little more 
than a legalised anarchy. 

Europe, cursed by this system, ' was losing ^j^^ p^^^. ^ 
ail knowledge of its own unity, all strength, and monas- 
and rapidly drifting into meaningless, pitiless up the 
antagonism of nations, classes, and indi- Pf°W^"^- , 

° ' ' 1 he impulse 

viduals.' It was from the clergy, or rather is extended 
from the monasteries, that the opposition to bishops and 
this state of things arose. From the monas- Popes. 
teries the impulse was communicated to the bishops, and 
from the bishops to the popes, who take up the work and 
try to give it principle and organisation. 

During the ninth century the papacy had fallen a 
victim to the evils abroad, and sank in degradation and 
contempt. Raised in the tenth century from this degra- 
dation by Otho I, and his successors she rapidly regained 
lost ground under the '■ German popes,' and rose daily to 
higher aspirations, to culminate in the acces- q^.^ ^^ 
sion of Gregory VII. This man, under his Vli., 1073. 
name of Hildebrand, had long held an important posi- 
tion in Europe. Son of a Tuscan carpenter, he had 
early embraced monasticism, and as a monk of Clugny, 
in Burgundy, had subjected himself to the discipline of 
the Benedictine rule. Returning to Rome, he became 
the great pope-maker of his day, contributed to the elec- 
tion of five of his predecessors, and directed the papal 
policy. On the death of Alexander II. (1073), the papal 
tiara, to which he had never aspired, was laid at his 
feet, and, abandoning the seclusion of monastic life, he 



1 68 The Normans in Europe, a.d, 

ascended the papal throne, prepared to subdue the world 
in the same spirit in which he had hitherto striven to 
conquer himself. Under Gregory VII. the schemes which 
had steadily been growing were perfected, and monas- 
ticism in his election rose to her highest fortune. 

Gregory VII., seeing the conflicting principles at work 
in Europe, the chaotic confusion, the triumph of cruelty 
and disorder, conceived the magnificent idea of 
a great spiritual autocracy which should serve 
as a principle of unity round which Europe might gather, 
and a force which should join together rival classes 
and interests. The Pope was to be the supreme head of 
Christendom, and ultimate arbiter of her affairs. To him 
should all appeals be made on international questions, on 
questions of peace and war ; while within the states his au- 
thority should watch over the inferior courts and see justice 
done. Elsewhere violence and fraud might run riot, but 
here, at Rome at least, all questions should be decided on 
the highest grounds of equity and morality. Other tribunals 
might be open only to the rich and powerful ; here all 
should gain a hearing. Elsewhere wickedness in high 
places might escape punishment, but here morality should 
be enforced on kings as well as on subjects, and the 
proudest criminal reduced to submission. Thus might 
the ' truce of God ' in time extend all over Europe, and 
wars be made to cease. Thus might the weak find 
aid against the strong, and right maintain itself against 
might ; while Europe, united in the confession of one 
faith, might here see reflected the image of its unity and 
its majesty. 

This magnificent ideal, it has been well said, was 
crossed by human frailty even in Gregory's days. ' Sub- 
sequently it was fatally degraded and discredited by the 
selfish and faithless temporising, the shameless greediness 
which grew into proverbs, wherever the name of Rome was 



1070-87. William's Ecclesiastical Policy. 169 

mentioned. It was maintained by shameful means and 
shameless forgeries which escaped detection from the 
uncritical eye of Europe at that time. The power grew 
to be abused, to "usurp the powers to which it was to have 
served as a counterpoise. It went through the usual 
course of successful power in human hands, and in every 
succeeding century these things grew worse. The ideal 
became more and more a shadow, the reality a more cor- 
rupt and intolerable mockery. But still it remains the 
most magnificent failure in human history.' 

Such was the ideal conceived, and partly realised, by 
Gregory VII. Let us consider what was 

,. . _. , Details of 

necessary to its realisation. First, the sove- Gregory's 
reigns of Europe must be induced, if possible, scheme. 
to do homage to the Pope, for naturally the scheme took 
the feudal shape which then predominated, 
and without such subordination the scheme claimed of 
could not work. Then, the celibacy of the ti'^,.|j^"^''- ^ 

•' •' Lehbacy of 

clergy must be enforced, whereby they might clergy 
become a separate order freed from secular 
interests and connected closely with the Pope. 

The ecclesiatical courts in each separate state must 
be made independent of the secular, and secured in their 
jurisdiction over all clerks and all causes indepen- 
afifecting morality and religion. Lay investi- dence of 

• CCclGS13.Stl- 

ture (investing the bishop with the ring and cal courts. 
the crozier) must be condemned, lest the JjJ-econ-^^' 
clergy should become dependent upon the demned. 
secular arm, and simony and servility enervate them. 
Thus the clerg}^, bound to the Pope by the ties of in- 
terest and devotion, would be a ready instrument in his 
hand for carrying out his schemes. 

These were the principles of Gregory's plan, which he 
was vigorously pressing upon Europe, and which he now 
hoped to see carried out in England. 



1 70 The Normans in Europe. a. d. 

William was not unwilling in most respects to satisfy 
William's ^^^ wishes. His policy may for clearness be 
policy. classed under two heads : (i) The relation of 

the Church to the State ; (2) The relation of Church and 
State to Rome. 

(i) In Anglo-Saxon times the Church and State had 
been closely connected. The bishops had sat side by side 
Relation of '^'^^^^ ^^^ secular officcrs in the Shire court. The 
State to Witenagemot had been as much an ecclesias- 

tical as a secular assembly ; its laws, indeed, had 
been rather ecclesiastical canons than secular laws. This 
Makes the William altered. Fully aware of the impor- 
Church a tance of the Church as a department of State, 
the barons, as a prmciple of order, he conceived the idea 
and'S-^ ''^' of using it as a counterbalance to the feudal 
creases its barons, ever ready to overthrow the central 
authority of the crown, and establish their 
own selfish independence. Hence his first care was to 
reform the Church and increase its power. 

Stigand, the Archbishop of Canterbury, convicted of 
illegally holding the See of Winchester with his own arch- 
Stigand bishopric, and of having received the palHum, 

deposed. the Symbol of his metropolitan power, from 

made arch- the false pope, Benedict X., was removed, and 
bishop. most of the Anglo-Saxon bishops shared his 

fate. In their place William sought Europe over for worthy 
substitutes. Lanfranc, called from Normandy, where he 
had been made abbot of William's monastery of St. 
Stephen at Caen, was appointed archbishop, and under 
Supremacy him the reform was continued. The supre- 
bury^ovtr' m^-cy of Canterbury over York was asserted. 
York. Marriage of the clergy M'as discouraged ; the 

encouraged, already married clergy were tolerated, but 
future marriages were strictly prohibited. In the chap- 
ters monks were substituted for the secular canons. The 



1070-87. William'' s Ecclesiastical Policy. lyi 

monasteries were reformed according to the stricter 
rules of the Norman monasteries to which Monasteries 
Lanfranc had been accustomed. reformed. 

Having thus reformed the worst abuses of the Church, 
Wilham proceeded to increase its power. Two of the 
bishops, Durham and Kent, were entrusted ^ 

• -r^ -I • -1, «• /-I -11 Power of 

with Counties Palatine. Many of the vihage bishops 
bishops were removed into fortified towns that increased. 
they might be better able to resist the feudal nobles. The 
see of Lichfield was removed to Chester, Sherborne to 
SaHsbury, Selsey to Chichester, Dorchester in Oxfordshire 
to Lincoln. The leading clergy were called to William's 
councils, and frequently were appointed to the office of 
justiciary (p. 223) and others, while the chancellor was in- 
variably an ecclesiastic. 

Lastly, William removed the bishop from the county 
court, and erected ecclesiastical courts in each ^ , . . 

EcClGS13..Stl- 

diocese. In these the bishop alone presided cal courts 
over all cases which affected the spiritual or established. 
Church interests. 

(2) So far Wilham fell in with Gregory's scheme, and 
reorganised the English Church, But this was not all 
that Gregorv claimed. He demanded the ^ , . 

- ''^ . . ,^, . ,^^.,,. , Relation of 

homage of the king. This vv illiam would state and 
not grant. Friendly relations with Rome he Rome^wil- 
was anxious to maintain, and the tax of Peter's Ham refuses 
Pence he would gladly pay ; he would even 
acknowledge the general supremacy of the Pope. But 
the oath of homage he would not take, ^ for neither,' said 
he, ' had he ever promised so to do, nor had his predeces- 
sors done so,' and Gregory, anxious to secure his friend- 
ship, dared not press the question of Investiture. 

The general character of his policy is summed up in the 
so-called Customs. By these he ordered that the king's leave 
must be obtained before any Pope were acknowledged in 



1/2 The Nor^nans in Europe.' a.d. 

England, before any papal synod were held, any letter 
_, ^ of the Pope's received, before any bishop 

The Cus- - ^ ^ ^ . 

toms of appealed to Rome, or any tenant m capite 

William. (those who held their lands immediately of the 
king) were excommunicated. 

William Thus William clearly showed himself de- 

claims to termined to rule the Church of England, and 

rule the . 07 

National against the great scheme of Gregory VII. 
Church. asserted a contrary one, that of a National 

Church, owing, indeed, a nominal allegiance to Rome, 
closely assimilated to her in doctrine, ritual and or- 
ganization, but still absolutely under the power of the 
crown. 

In all this William was heartily supported by the 
vigorous common-sense of Lanfranc, and Gregory had 
his hands too full in pressing his claims on the Emperor, 
Henry IV., to quarrel with William on the subject. 

Thus, during William's time, the system was firmly 
established, and no quarrel arose till the reigns of his 
successors. 

The policy of William, it can hardly be doubted, was 
on the whole beneficial. The abuses of the Anglo-Saxon 
Beneficial Church were removed. Norman bishops were 
wfiifam's °^ certainly better educated, and it was well that 
policy ; the Church should be brought into closer con- 

nexion with Rome, which, with all its faults, was the real 
source of vigour at that date. Under their influence the 
activity of the Church revived, while her discipline was 
improved. 

In the increased power of the Church a valuable 
balance was found to that of the feudal baronage, while 
the Church itself was kept in check by the unqualified 
except in authority of the king. 

two cases. jj^ ^ these way s William's changes were for 

good, but in two ways they did harm. 



1070-87. Willianis Ecclesiastical Policy. i^j^ 

(i) The right of royal patronage, though fairly ad 

ministered by William, was under his imme- Lay patron- 

diate successor shamefully abused ; and (2) in ^|^°^j^" 

William's ordinance erecting the spiritual Encroach- 

, 1 , , r J ^' r • ments of ec- 

courts lay the foundation 01 many a serious clesiasticai 
quarrel in after times. His error here is to be courts. 
found, not so much in erecting the courts, as in not more 
clearly defining the limits of their jurisdiction. During his 
own reign this caused no difficulty, but very soon the eccle- 
siastical courts began to encroach upon the temporal. 
In these encroachments the churchmen were not indeed 
actuated entirely by selfish motives, or by narrow pro- 
fessional motives. Owing to the more perfect system of 
procedure established in their courts, they became ex- 
ceedingly popular and people flocked of their own accord 
to the bishop's court. But the result was most pernicious. 
The jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts grew apace, 
and infringed on that of the temporal. The clergy's privi- 
lege of being tried by these courts alone threatened to 
render them absolutely independent of the secular arm, 
and finally, under Henry II. the abuses were so flagrant 
that Henry interfered, and fought his fatal quarrel with 
Becket on this very point. 



CHAPTER XIV. 

END OF REIGN OF WILLIAM L 

We must now return to the year 1071, the date of the 
final conquest of the country, William was not fated to 
enjoy a lengthened peace, and no sooner were the Anglo- 
Saxon revolts crushed than troubles arose from different 
quarters. 

The conquest of Maine had been accomplished just 
before William's invasion of England ; but his rule was 



1/4 



The Normans in Etirope. 



A.D. 



Le Mans 
rebels, and, 
forming a 
municipa- 
lity, appeals 
to Fulk IV 
(Rechin) of 
Anjou. 



most distasteful to the people of that province and 
Quarrels they now took the opportunity of his absence 
?|^°P'^ to abandon their allegiance. They first appealed 

1073. to one of the daughters of their last Count, 

Herbert, who came north with her husband, Azzo Mar- 
The town of ^uis of Este, and occupied the country. This, 
however, did not satisfy the townsmen of Le 
Mans, the capital. They had long suffered 
from the arbitrary rule of their petty feudal 
lords, and were anxious to establish their 
liberties on some more secure basis. Accor- 
dingly they formed themselves into a municipality or 
commune, bound themselves to maintain their new-born 
freedom, and again fell back upon their old overlord the 
Count of Anjou, who thus once more ruled in Maine. 

The news at once brought William across the Chan- 
nel. Fulk was tardy in his assistance, and the rebels, to 
escape the wasting of their lands, surrendered 
the town, and acknowledged Robert, William's 
eldest son, as their Count. Still, William dared 
not crush out the spirit of municipal freedom. 
He promised to observe their privileges, and 
Le Mans, losing her independence, retained 
her civic rights, to become one of the earliest privileged 
communes of Northern France. 

At the treaty of Blanchelande which followed between 



William 
invades 
Maine. 
Robert is ac- 
knowledged 
Count, but 
respects the 
privileges of 
Le Mans. 



Treaty of 
Blanche- 
lande. Ro- 
bert holds 
Maine of 
Anjou. 



the County as a fief of Anjou. 

From this petty quarrel on the Continent 
William was recalled by an outbreak of his 
feudal barons at home. Their rebellion opens 
a new phase of English history. It was the 
first of those attempts on the part of the feu- 
dal nobles to throw off the stern rule of their 

new-found kings which troubled England till the reign of 

Henry H. 



Rebellion of 
the feudal 
barons in 
England. 
1075-1076. 



1075-76. E?id of ReigJi cf William I. 175 

The actual companions of William in his invasion had 
submitted to him ; but they were now fast dying out, and 
it is their sons who now rebel against the stern rule of 
the Conqueror, The Earldom of Hereford Roger de 
was now in the hands of Roger de Breteuil, Breteuii, 

11- 1 • ^^.rl of 

the son of Wilham's trusted adviser and jus- Hereford, 
ticiary William Fitz-Osbern ; that of Norfolk Jerl^EaS'S' 
was in the hands of Ralph Guader. These Norfolk. 
two earls, in common with many of the Norman nobles, 
had long chafed under the strict rule of William, and 
longed to establish their feudal independence in England. 
William, moreover, had forbidden a marriage between 
Ralph and Roger's sister, probably because he feared the 
result of such an alliance. This filled up the measure 
of their discontent. In spite of William's refusal, they 
solemnised the marriage. At the bridal feast they en- 
tered into a conspiracy, and gained the assist- 
ance of Waltheof Earl of Northampton, the 
only remaining Anglo-Saxon earl, who had been treated 
kindly by William, and given the king's niece Judith in 
marriage. Their intentions are clearly seen obiect of 
from the agreement made between them, the rebels. 
England was to be restored to the condition it was in 
during King Edward's reign. One of the three conspirators 
should be king, the other two earls, who of course would 
enjoy practical independence. The attempt, however, en- 
tirely failed. The Anglo-Saxons knew their in- ^j^^ ^.^^^j 
terests too well to join the rebellion, and it was lion crushed 
speedily suppressed. Ralph fled to Brittany, and Roger 
was taken prisoner to end his days in captivity. The 
fate of Waltheof was more tragic. It does not appear 
that he gave more than a tacit acquiescence to the con- 
spiracy. Indeed, when the rebellion broke out he 
betrayed the plot to Lanfranc, and was for the moment 
pardoned. But soon after the accusation was again 
revived, and he was put to death, some said at the 



1/6 The No7'7nans in Europe. a.d. 

instigation of his unnatural wife. This, the only political 
execution of William's reign, has been bitterly laid to his 
account. It was cruel, it was perhaps hardly just ; but 
no doubt WiUiam was prompted to the act by political 
motives. It was an act of policy to destroy the last chief 
of the Anglo-Saxon race, the last leader to whom they 
could look. But Waltheof was looked upon as a national 
saint by the conquered people, and the later troubles of 
William's reign were by them considered as the vengeance 
of God upon the king's tyranny. 

For here the prosperity of Wilham's reign ceased. 
Hitherto he had been successful in all his wars and in 
.,, every scheme he undertook. From this date 

111 success 

of William's failures began to thicken around him, while 
years, j^jg character darkened as life drew to a close. 
His temper waxed harsher, his yoke lay heavier on his 
subjects, his craving for money grew, and England 
suffered greatly. 

Next year followed the revolt of his son Robert, 
which again assumed the character of a rebelhon of 
Rebellion of ^^^ feudal noblcs. Before invading England 
Robert. William had promised to resign Normandy 

to his eldest son in the event of his success. 
This he probably did to allay the jealousy of Philip of 
France ; but it was only a nominal promise, and when 
Robert claimed its fulfilment, William curtly answered 
that ' he did not intend to throw off his clothes till he 
Philip joins Went to bed.' On this, Robert rose in arms, 
Robert. ^^d was aided by Philip of France, and many of 

the young nobility, who seized the opportunity once more 
Robert of to estabhsh their independence. Robert of Be- 
Wim^de lesme, son of Roger Montgomery of Shrews- 
Breteuil. bury, and William of Breteuil, son of Wilham 
Fitz-Osbern, and brother of the old conspirator Roger, 
were the two most important men, both sons of William's 



1080-1085. End of Reign of William I. 177 

most trusted advisers. In the action which ensued at Ger- 
beroi, WiHiam, unhorsed and wounded by his 

' ^ '1 , -T • Battle of 

son, was forced to seek a reconcmation, to Gerberoi, 
which Robert, who was struck with horror at J?^,?; , 

' s ather and 

his own deed, consented. son recon- 

Wilham's half-brother Odo next disturbed 
the realm. To this man, Bishop of Bayeux, had been 
given the County Palatine of Kent. But even Troubles 
this did not satisfy his ambitious spirit, fie ^^^^ ^^° 
aimed at becoming Pope, and prepared an 1082. 
army in England to enforce his claim. His turbulent 
and cruel conduct had long caused trouble to William, 
and now he was arrested. This arrest might have been 
considered an encroachment on the privileges He is ar- 
of ecclesiastics, who claimed to be tried in ^^'^f'^^^^ 

' Jtarl of 

their own courts granted them by William Kent. 
himself. William, therefore, declared him arrested not 
as bishop but as earl, and did not release him till he 
himself was on his death-bed. 

In 1085 William was threatened by danger from 
another quarter. The Kings of Norway and Denmark 
had looked with jealousy upon the success of 
the Norman WilHam. Olaf of Norway might Threatened 
still have remembered the compact between IrJ^ Nor- 
Tostig and Harald Hardrada, while Canute, way and 
who then ruled in Denmark, though allied by 
marriage with William through his wife, the daughter of 
Robert le Frison, Count of Flanders, had already made 
settlements in England. Canute now prepared for a last 
attempt, and, gaining the aid of Olaf and of the Count of 
Flanders, threatened William with a formidable coalition. 
William, to meet the danger, hastily levied foreign 
mercenaries, and, to secure the fidelity of his subjects, 
exacted the famous oath of homage from all his sub- 
jects at the Council of Sarum. Fortunately, however, the 
M.H. N 



1/8 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

expedition was checked by contrary winds. Olaf was 

bribed by William, and in the following year 

exacts™!! Canute fell a victim to a rebellion of his own 

oath of subjects, caused by discontent at his hasty 

homage -^ ' •' , , •' 

from all his innovations. From this time the Danes lost 
su jec s. ^-j^^ command of the sea. The reforms in- 
augurated by Canute brought their institutions into con- 
formity with the rest of Europe, and Denmark troubled 
her no more. 

The Danish invasion probably hastened the com- 
pletion of the Domesday Survey, one of the most im- 
Th D mes- po^'tant acts of William's reign. This great 
day Survey, work Completes the organization of William. 
(i.) It was intended to serve as the basis of 
taxation ; (2) as the authority by which all disputes con- 
cerning land might be settled ; (3) and as a muster roll of 
the nation. As a census it is not exhaustive ; the three 
northern counties and part of Westmorland, Lanca- 
shire, and Monmouthshire, probably on account of their 
disturbed state, are not mentioned, nor are London and 
Winchester and a few other towns, probably because of 
charters of immunity previously granted. But as far as 
it goes it is very exact and correct. From its pages the 
Conqueror could at a glance discover the state of his 
revenues, the wealth, the consequence of every personage 
in his kingdom. No nation in Europe possesses such a 
monument of its early state, nor can later times point to 
Way in many achievements like it. The means by 

which infor- -^j^icji ^he information was to be collected 
collected. were these. Commissioners went forth into 
every shire, and there, calling the sheriffs, the parish 
priests, the reeves of the townships, and men of each 
manor before them, required them on their oath to 
answer these questions : ' What is the name of your 
township ? Who was lord thereof, bishop or abbot in 



1087. End of Reign of William I. 179 

the days of Good King Edward? How many thanes, 
how many freemen, how many villeins are there ? How 
many acres, and what their value in King Edward's 
time ? What their value now ? What has each freeman ? 
How many oxen, how many cows, how many sheep, how 
many swine ? ' The information thus collected was then 
put into shape, and called the Domesday Book^ Consequent 
and with such activity was the work carried discontent. 
on that it was completed within a year. Loud were the com- 
plaints throughout the land, and in some places riots ensued. 
The people considered it an arbitrary invasion of their 
rights. It is a shame, they said, that the king should pry 
into each man's means, a shame even to tell of such 
tyranny, though the king thought no shame to do it. 
Such is always the cry of the opponents of order, and the 
independence of the English resented, as they have ever 
done, the interference of government. But their com- 
plaints were ill-founded. It was no tyranny, but the 
work of a great organization, the essential preliminary 
and accompaniment of strong government. On its com- 
pletion a great assembly was held in Salisbury Plain, when 
the ordinance before mentioned was passed, ordering 
every freeman to take an oath of allegiance directly to the 
king himself. 

In the following year a quarrel broke out with Philip 
for the possession of the Vexin. This had Quarrel 
been granted by Henry I. to William's father ^/prfn^c? 
in return for the aid given by the Norman about the 
duke to Henry when fighting for his crown. 1087. ' 
But Philip now invaded it. William, irritated by a coarse 
jest of the French king, ravaged the country and burnt 
the town of Mantes. As he proudly rode over the ruins 
of the town, his horse stumbled on some hot Death of 
ashes, and the rider, thrown violently on the WiiUam. 
pommel, sustained a fatal injury. Carried to Rouen, he 



i8o The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

lingered long enough to declare his wishes. Robert was 
His last given Normandy and the lands which William 

commands. \l2.^ gained by inheritance. William Rufus, his 
second son, he named as successor to those lands which 
he had gained himself, while to Henry, his third son, he 
left a present of 5,000 pounds of silver, with the pro- 
phetic promise that he, becoming greater than either of 
his brothers, would one day possess far greater and ampler 
power. Then turning to his confessor, he deplored the 
evils of his past life. ^ No tongue can tell,' said he, ' the 
deeds of wickedness I have perpetrated in my weary 
pilgrimage of toil and care.' He deplored his birth : 
born to warfare, polluted with bloodshed from his earliest 
years, his trials, the base ingratitude he had met with. 
He also extolled his own virtues, praised his conscien- 
tious appointments in the Church and his alms, and then, 
freeing all the state captives with a prophecy of the ills 
that Odo by his ambition would bring upon his country, 
passed away at the hour of prime. Thus the great Con- 
queror was at last at rest. 

The scene of his death was a sad satire on the power 
of man. His sons, eager only to gain their appointed 
shares, departed before their father's eyes were 
offered to closcd — Rufus to England, Robert to Nor- 
thebody. mandy, Henry to seize the treasure; and the 
corpse of the strong man who but a few minutes before 
struck fear into all who angered him, was now shamefully 
despoiled and stripped, and hurried, almost without 
decent burial, into its unkingly grave, the owner of the 
soil demanding his price before he allowed the body to 
be buried. 

A great man thus passed away — a man who did great 
things for England. In William the Norman character 
found its greatest representative. To the consummate 
powers of a general he added the subtle skill of a diplo- 



1087. End of Reign of William I. 181 

matist and the foresight of a statesman. Born a bastard, 
and left fatherless at an early age, he triumphed Review of 
over all his foes in Normandy, and strongly character 
organized his dukedom. Then passing from and life. 
Normandy to England, he changed the name of Bastard 
for that of Conqueror, and in welding the Saxon and 
Norman institutions together he illustrated the Norman 
talent for adaptation by his wise and thoughtful policy. 
He reorganized our whole political life, saved England 
from the ills which were eating at its core, gave it unity 
and strength, and first made it a great power in Europe. 
Yet these great qualities of his were stained by great 
blemishes. William was an irresponsible despot, and his 
people found him so. To the Anglo-Saxons, although he 
continued the old national and constitutional forms, and 
left to the people the enjoyment of their own law, he was 
stark and stern. The form of their government remained, 
but the spirit was changed, and many are the complaints 
on account of the fiscal and other oppressions. His rule 
was that of a wise and wary, a strong and resolute, an 
arbitrary though not a wanton despot. He marked out 
his goal, and no scruples of conscience or mercy stayed 
him from attaining it. There was nothing which he 
would not do to gain his end, and much was the suffering 
he thereby brought on both Anglo-Saxon and Norman. 
He was a man born to be feared, not to be loved, and 
when life had departed, and the great Conqueror's hand 
lay cold, the indignities which mean wretches heaped upon 
the lifeless corpse bore witness to the fact that fear once 
gone, hatred arose and drove out even the sentiment of 
respect. 



1 82 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

CHAPTER XV. 

WILLIAM RUFUS. 

In the separation of England from Normandy, accord- 
. . r incr to the will of the Conqueror, we have a 

Accession 01 " '- ' 

William clue to the reign of William Rufus and many 

Rufus, 1087, T . 

a succeedmg reign. 
The English welcomed that act as a restoration of 
their nationality, and a pledge that England should no 

longer be a mere province of the Norman 
among the kingdom. Headed, therefore, by Lanfranc, 
English. ^]^Q j^g^^ imbibed thoroughly English sympa- 

thies, and Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester, the only na- 
tional bishop who remained, they heartily supported the 
claims of William Rufus, and welcomed his coronation 

at Winchester with delight. The Norman 

Disliked by , , , , 

the Norman baronage, on the contrary, resented the sepa- 
barons. ration of the two kingdoms, whereby their 

conquered possessions in England were separated from 
their hereditary property in Normandy, and their hopes 
of establishing their feudal independence were marred. 
They sup- Led by Odo of Bayeux and the Count of Mor- 
cidmof ^^^^J both half-brothers of the Conqueror^ 

Robert. Roger of Montgomery, and his son Robert 

of Belesme, Eustace of Boulogne, and Roger Bigod, they 
disputed the will of the Conqueror, and supported the 
claim of Robert. 

Rufus was thus forced to appeal to the English. He 
issued a proclamation, in which he promised to refrain 
from arbitrary taxations, to give up all newly introduced 
Rufus ap- abuses, and to let everyone sport on his own 
peals to the domain. Then summoning all the English 

English. .-I. . n- ^ ■ -..7 

to jom him, on pam of bemg proclamied nith- 
ing or worthless, he collected an army to which London 



1 09 1. William Rufus. 183 

and the Cinque Ports largely contributed. He reduced 
the castle of Rochester, which Odo had The rebel- 
seized, bought off Roger Montgomery of p°essJd"^' 
Shrewsbury, and drove the rebels from the 1090. 
country. 

He then leagued himself with the discontented nobles 
of Normandy and invaded that duchy, until Ruf^g 
he was bought off by Robert, who consented invades 
to a treaty by which the survivor was to sue- Treaty 0/ 
ceed to the other's dominions if either died ^^®"' ^°9^' 
without heirs. 

Rufus was thus established on the English throne 
entirely through the assistance of the English. They 
were ill requited by the oppressive tyrant. As long as 
Lanfranc lived he was restrained by his influence ; but 
when Lanfranc died his true character began 
to show itself. With much of the ability, Lanfranc, 
decision, and good generalship of his father, n°^'s^u' 
he presented in other respects a complete con- character 
trast to him. William I., in spite of his many ^pp^^"^^' 
faults, had been at heart a religious and austere man. 
He had hated anarchy as dangerous to his realm, and 
licentiousness as the outward garb of anarchy. His son 
was utterly wanting in all religious principle, and shocked 
the morals even of that age by his boisterous and inde- 
cent profligacy. His abilities were prostituted to his 
selfish love of power, and instead of trying to prevent 
anarchy in his kingdom, he turned it to his own account. 
Wanting in the business-like qualities of his father, he 
entrusted all state matters to his minister, 
Ranulf Flambard, who resembled the son much Ranuif 
as Lanfranc resembled the father. If Lan- Flambard. 
franc was the best of the statesmen ecclesiastics, Ranulf 
Flambard was the worst. Bom of a low Norman family, 
which had settled in the New Forest under Edward the 



1 84 The Normans in Europe. a. d. 

Confessor, he became one of the clerks of the Chancery, 
rapidly rose to favour, and became Bishop of Durham 
and chief minister. Now was seen the result of the great 
authority assumed by William over the Church, and how 
by a wicked king that power might be abused ; and Eng- 
land experienced all the ills to avoid which the papal 
His charac- ^^^^ ^^^ been formed. Ranulf Flambard was 
tei". one of those churchmen who had become en- 

tirely secularised by the drudgery of the Chancery busi- 
ness, and, now in power, he proceeded to let those secular 
ideas have full play. Without education, but with great 
natural powers and boundless fluency of tongue, coarse, 
impudent, and cunning, he was just the servant for the 
infamous Rufus. Abetted by the king, he ground down 
the people by fiscal oppression, and then deliberately set 

to work not _only to plunder but to degrade 
secularise and injure the Church. He introduced a 
the Church, system of barefaced and daring venality, 
which put up everything in Church and State for sale, 
.and threatened to secularise the Church itself. He 
started the theory that the vacant benefices belonged to 
the king, following the analogy of the temporal fiefs. For 

years after Lanfranc's death the See of Can- 
terburykept tcrbury was kept vacant, and its revenues 
vacant. were dissipated in contributing to the dissolute 

tastes of the king, who declared that no one should be 
archbishop but himself. In this policy the Red king was 
influenced by two motives — first, to free himself from the 
irksome restraint which an archbishop would be sure 
to place upon his gross and reckless profligacy ; and 
secondly, because he knew that so long as the primacy 
was vacant, little opposition would be offered to him, and 
he would find it easy to wreak his will upon the rest of 
the possessions of the Church. So steadily was this 
perverse policy maintained, that at the end of his reign 



I093. William Rufiis. 185 

not only was the archbishop of -Canterbury an exile, 
but four bishoprics and eleven abbeys were without pas- 
tors. In the struggle, the bishops, jealous of Apathy of 
the supremacy of Canterbury, showed singular the bishops. 
apathy. Thus, in spite of the discontent of his people 
and the frequent petitions to him, one of which is peculiar, 
' that the king would allow it to be enjoined that the people 
should pray that the king's heart might be changed, 
he continued obstinate until a dangerous illness Anselm 
brought on a temporary fit of remorse as ^^°bisW 
violent as is usual in ill-balanced minds. Then, 1093. 
at last, giving way to a long-expressed desire of his 
country, he appointed Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury. 
This great man was a Lombard, like Lanfranc, and of 
noble birth. He had been attracted to Bee by the fame 
of Lanfranc, and there, in spite . of their very j^j^ ^}^^_ 
different characters, had become one of his racter con- 

.J J • trasted with 

deaiest friends. To his predecessor he that of 
formed a complete contrast. Lanfranc was a Lanfranc. 
man of the world, gifted with a practical, vigorous turn of 
mind. Anselm, on the contrary, deficient in the worldly 
qualities, far surpassed his friend in originality of thought 
and subtlety of mind. He was the first great philosopher of 
Christian Europe, and in his works at once laid the basis 
of the future scholastic philosophy, and went beyond it. 
Eager for the discovery of exact truth, he plunged fearlessly 
into the great questions of the proof of the existence of 
God, the relation of faith to reason, the meaning of the In- 
carnation — subjects which after him were scarcely touched 
cill the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. His biographer 
and friend, Eadmer, tells us of the astonishment caused 
by his attempts to unravel ^ these the darkest of the ques- 
tions concerning the Divine Nature and our faith, which 
lay hid or covered by much obscurity in the Divine 
Scriptures.' To this speculative turn of mind Anselm 



1 86 The Nor mans in EiLrope. a.d. 

added a childlike simplicity, a tenderness never surpassed. 
He loved to teach the young and to mould their minds 
when ' they were still like wax, ready to take the impres- 
sion marked upon them.' ' He loved to tend the sick, and 
he behaved/ says his chronicler, '- so that all men loved 
him as their dear father. He so touched the hearts of 
the English that there was no count or countess or power- 
ful person but thought they had lost much in the sight 
of God if it had not chanced to them to have done 
some service to him. So it was, he was to those in 
health a father, to the sick a mother.' Even the stern 
Conqueror William loved him better than any man, and 
wished to see him before anyone else when he lay on 
his death-bed. Yet with all this tenderness he was austere ; 
inexorably severe to his own faults and to those of others, 
and, once convinced that any course was wrong, no power 
on earth could make him acquiesce in it. 

After Lanfranc had been removed to St, Stephen's 
at Caen, Anselm had become abbot of Bee, and now 
he was called to succeed him in the See of Canter- 
bury, This he accepted very much against 
lingness to his will, and only from the highest sense of 
The^ ro- duty, upon William making three promises : 
misesof the (i) To acknowledge Urban II. pope ; (2) To 

"^^ restore all property belonging to the See of 

Canterbury ; (3) To act on the advice and counsel of the 
archbishop. 

The ills which might ensue from the subservience of the 
Church to the king had clearly appeared during the past 
Evils of the ^'^^^ years, and must have furnished proof to 
subordina- Anselm of the dangers of the System. England 
Church to thereby was in danger of again being cut off 
the State. from Rome, and of having its Church reduced 
to the condition of a mere slave to the king, who could 
despoil it of its revenues at will. It would have thus lost 



I093. 



William Rtcfus. 187 



all independence, have become degraded, and, losing all 
moral consistency of purpose, would have ceased to 
struggle against immorality and wickedness, or to in- 
fluence the country for good. But Anselm scarcely needed 
such argument. For, as if by poetic justice, Anselm is 
Rufus could not have appointed a more reso- o/thT°a^al 
lute antagonist. Lanfranc was the represen- theory, 
tative of the independence of the national church. An- 
selm was the supporter of the papal authority in its 
extremest pretensions. Deficient in the strong practical 
common-sense which characterised his predecessor, he 
was by his contemplative, imaginative character better 
fitted to find rest in a great ideal, to which his philoso- 
phical spirit would give an existence and a reality which 
it did not, in fact, possess. Lanfranc was a thorough man 
of the world, and saw the dangers of the papal scheme, 
and how it failed in the; working. Anselm was in no sort a 
man of the world, but a speculative recluse, a man of books 
and thought, and was carried away by the magnificence of 
the scheme which promised to complete the gradation of 
the hierarchy and give completeness and sanctity to the 
whole feudal society. The whole world might be con- 
sidered as holding of one another, and all eventually of 
the Pope, who himself, as his vicegerent, held of Christ. 
Thus all the world might be considered the vassals and 
servants of Christ, in theory as well as in fact. Was not 
this worth struggling for 1 Such were the thoughts of the 
man whom William Rufus had placed in the archiepisco- 
pal chair. 

The result might have been easily foreseen. The 
archbishop at once claimed the fulfilment of the promises 
made when he accepted the primacy. He Quarrel 
reproved the vices of the royal court, where khi^and^^^ 
the king, with his renewed health, had retaken Anselm. 
to his old courses, and where the licentious ways of the 



1 88 The Normans in Europe. a.d, 

courtiers, their effeminate dress, long hair, and peaked 
Anselm shoes, did violence to Anselm's pious cha- 

demands racter. He attacked the king for keeping 

the fulfil- 1 ,- 1 r • - • 

ment of the benefices vacant, and refusing to restore the « 
mTsf s^ and property ahenated from the See of Canterbury, 
attacks the William, on his part, demanded a gift from 
court. his See. This Anselm, not improperly, re- 

demands a fused, because a simoniacal interpretatioij 
relief from might be put upon the transaction, and it 
Anselm would inevitably lead to simony, 

refuses. Th.^ qucstion of investiture next came 

forward. The grant of the 'pallium,^ or ecclesias- 
tical vestment symbolical of metropK)litan authority, 
Question of ^^"^ been claimed by the Popes since the 
investiture, sixth ccntury, and Anselm now asked leave 
to go to Rome to obtain it. William refused with anger, 
declaring that he had not even yet accepted Urban II., 
who was struggling against an anti-pope, and he claimed 
the right of acknowledging the Pope or no as he pleased. 
He even thought of deposing Anselm, and in this was 
supported by the bishops, who showed strange servility.' 
But the common-sense of the barons checked him, and the 
^ matter was settled by a compromise. Urban, 

The ques- , . . , , 

tion com- Struggling as he was with the emperor, 
promised. Henry IV., on the same question, dared not 
press his claims on England, and when William ac- 
knowledged him, allowed the pallium to be laid on the 
altar rails, whence Anselm took it and invested him- 
Finai ^^^' "^^^ there could be no truce between 

quarrel. archbishop and king ; and finally, when Rufus 

accused Anselm of sending his contingent improperly 
armed to the Welsh war then going on, Anselm demanded 
leave to go to Rome to consult the Pope. William seized 
the opportunity of freeing himself from his archbishop. 
He bade him go, but never more return ; and for the rest 



1097- 



William Rufus. 189 



of the king's life the See of Canterbury was kept prac- 
tically vacant, and the revenues were appro- 
priated by the king. Thus began that system appeals to 
of appeals to Rome, which became so fruitful j^"™ ^ ^^ 
of future ills. Yet in all this Anselm was country. 
so clearly fighting for what was right, that ^°^^' 
our sympathies are entirely with him, and we are 
only too glad to forgive any slight temper or want of 
tact and courtesy which at times appear in him. He 
was not, indeed, fitted to battle with the world, with 
the overbearing insolence and noisy tyranny of a wanton 
despot like William Rufus. Eadmer, his loving chronicler, 
most pathetically illustrates this : ' We were accustomed to 
lead him away from the assembly a little when he was tired, 
and restore him with a passage of Scripture or a theological 
question. We asked him why he, such a vigorous man, 
became on such occasions so weak and faint-hearted. He 
replied that in this respect; he was altogether a child. He 
likened himself to an owl who is only well when it is with 
its young ones in its hole, but if it comes out among the 
crows andravens sees nothingbut pecking beaks and knows 
■not which way to turn.' Nor again are we inclined to be 
scrupulous even on questions where principle was at stake, 
such as the question of the pallium, which affected the prin- 
ciple of the royal supremacy ; or, again, Anselm's demand 
to go to Rome for advice, whereby he had broken, so his 
cruel oppressor asserted, William the Conqueror's ' cus- 
toms.' The question of principle we postpone to Henry I.'s 
reign, when it comes forward more prominently. During 
the quarrel with Rufus it is overborne by other questions. 
I William Rufus was a violent, unscrupulous, and rapacious 
tyrant, the very man against whom the Pope had raised 
his scheme ; and Anselm, after having most unwillingly 
accepted the archiepiscopal office, resolutely stood up for 
the good and right and just. Indeed, we go as far as to 



1 90 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

say that had all kings been like Rufus, all archbishops 
like Anselm, the papal authority could not have been 
pressed too strongly, or the ecclesiastical censures wielded 
too severely. The existence of such kings, of such 
brutality, selfishness, and misrule, justifies the extremest 
of the papal claims. And, lastly, it is important to 
remember that in this opposition of the Church to the 
irresponsible despotism of the Norman kings, the 
people first learnt their right and duty to resist an en- 
croaching royal power, a lesson which they had else easily 
forgotten. 

During the quarrel with Anselm the following events 
had happened. 

Malcolm Canmore, brought up in the court of Ed- 
ward the Confessor, had overthrown the usurper Macbeth 
in 1054, through the aid of Siward of Northum- 
war. bria. This English alliance was subsequently 

1091-1093. strengthened by his marriage with Margaret, 
sister of Edgar the ^theling. 

Accordingly, during William's reign, Malcolm had 
supported the national revolts against the Conqueror, r 
but had been defeated and forced to swear allegiance to 
William. He still, however, continued his English policy, 
and his court formed the chief refuge for the English 
when flying from Norman tyranny. Thus the English 
language and institutions spread to Scotland, and the 
latter became the basis of the Scotch constitution. Feu- 
dalism was established. The Lothians, Anglicised by the 
recoil of the Norman invasion, were thoroughly civilised, 
and under Malcolm began to form the nucleus of the 
future Scottish kingdom. The discipline and ceremonial 
of the English Church were introduced, to improve the 
condition of the Keltic Church, which had become disor- 
ganized. English clergy were sent by Lanfranc, and 
monasteries after the Norman model were established. 



109 1- 1094- William Rufus. 191 

In 1 09 1 hostilities broke out once more between the 
two countries. The quarrel was at first compromised 
by Malcolm doing homage to William, but Malcolm 
two years afterwards Malcolm complained of gngfa^d 
William's conduct in fortifying Carlisle and 1093. 
settling English peasants from the south there. This he 
asserted to be a violation of the rights of the Scotch king, 
who claimed Cumberland as immediate lord. On Wil- 
liam's refusal to do him justice, Malcolm invaded the 
northern counties, but, when he was besieging He is sur- 
Alnwick, was surprised by Robert Mowbray, slainlt^"^^ 
Earl of Northumberland, and slain. Mar- Alnwick. 
garet died soon after, and Scotland became the victim of 
a civil war. The Keltic population, who had been jealous 
of the English sympathies of Malcolm and the q— i ^^^ -^^ 
supremacy of Lothian, followed Donald Bean, Scotland. 
the brother of Malcolm, who also gained the support of 
Magnus of Norway ; while Malcolm's children led the 
English party. This war was not ended till the year 
1097, when Edgar, the son of Margaret, was j, , 
restored by Edgar the yEtheling, with the help finally as- 
of an English army lent him by William. Un- throne. 
der this king the Anglicising process became ^°97- 
complete, and Scotland became, at some little distance 
behind, the counterpart of England. 

Meanwhile Rufus had been engaged in crushing 
another rebellion of his feudal nobles headed x^r 

Wars with 

by Mowbray, Earl of Northumberland, and in feudal ba- 

another war with Robert. On this occasion Robm. 
he ordered a general levy of the militia to the ^°94- 

coast, and then, exacting ten shillings from each, the 
journey-money they had received from their 

counties, sent them home again. This extor- made. ^Ro- 

tion helped to fill his treasury, but the war NormS^^ 

was not carried on; and shortly afterwards to Rufus, 



192 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

and goes on Robert, eager to join the first Crusade, 
'^^icSe^^'^^' pledged Normandy to his brother for the 
sum of 6,666/. 

In the Crusade which followed but few of William's 
subjects took part. It was not till the second Cru- 
sade that England caught the enthusiasm 
Crusade. of the Continent, and joined the rest of 
1095-1099. Europe in her great wars against the East. 
But many a Norman noble followed Robert, to join their 
cousins of the South on the shores of Palestine, and the 
fortunes of the first Crusade are so closely bound up 
with the Norman name that it calls for a passing notice 
here. 

To understand the causes of the Crusades we must 

remember the many conflicting emotions which stirred 

the heart of Europe, and which, for once 

causes of the United in the Crusades, hurled Western 

Crusades. Europe upon Asia. 

These causes, as far as the masses were concerned, 
were mainly two. 

(i) A spirit of religious enthusiasm. This, taking as 
was natural in those days an outward material form, had 
Religious causcd that great monastic revival of which 
enthusiasm, we have before spoken, and had led many 
pilgrims along the weary and dangerous road to Palestine. 
The fascination of the Holy Land was irresistible. Men 
could not believe that there was not some real tangible 
virtue in the Holy Land itself. Would not the mere 
standing on the ground Ijallowed by the scenes of their 
Lord's life and death at once purge them from the pollu- 
tion of their sins and make them clean ? Thus, as we draw 
near to the era of the Crusades, there is hardly a king, a 
duke, a count, who had not been on a pilgrimage to the 
holy places, or had not died lamenting that death had 
cut him off ere his vow had been fulfilled. This was the 



1095-1099. William Rufus. 193 

spirit which was lashed to religious frenzy by the news 
that Jerusalem had fallen into the hands of the Turks 
(1096), that the pilgrims were cruelly treated, and that the 
Sepulchre of our Lord, hitherto respected even by 
Mahometans, was treated with contempt. 

(2) There was that spirit of adventure, which, often 
degenerating into reckless licence, alone explains the 
anarchy of the times. In the Crusade men g • j^ of 
saw for the first time the possibility of satis- adventure, 
fying these strangely divergent passions, and hence in 
part the extraordinary enthusiasm which seized on West- 
ern Christendom. Hitherto these discordant impulses 
had conflicted and had caused the strange contrasts 
marking the lives of the men of the earlier ages — cruelty 
and rapacity alternating with strange fits of terrified de- 
votion. A life spent in wild licence suddenly hid in the 
obscurity of a monastery ; men expiating past misdeeds by 
frantic efforts of self-abasement. 

But among the leaders these simple motives were 
supplemented and sometimes obscured by others. The 
Pope saw in the crusades the only hope of a ^ . 

Foreign 

great coalition against the infidel foe. The policy of the 
Turkish hosts were threatening Europe, and p°p^^- 
if not checked in time the struggle might have to be 
fought out in Europe itself. Europe, unconscious as she 
was of her unity, knew not how to coalesce. The Church 
alone formed a bond of unioiij and the only hope of 
united action lay in a religious war. So thought Gre- 
gory VII. himself, and he had tried to preach a Crusade 
before his death. To this view, in the case of Urban II., 
was added the imperative necessity of gaining the aid 
of Europe against his rival the anti-pope, set up by his 
enemy the Emperor Henry IV. ; and how could this be 
better done than by preaching a crusade, and thus as- 
suming the leadership of the great Christian army, whose 
M.H, O 



?94 ^'^^ Normans in Europe. a.d. 

designs, it might be said, the Emperor was thwarting by 
his own selfish aims? The commercial towns of Italy 
looked to these Crusades in the hope of re-establishing 
their commerce with the East, which had been endan- 
increase of gercd by the fall of Jerusalem, at that time the 
commerce. market for Eastern goods. But, lastly, the 
counts and feudal lords of Europe hoped to carve prin- 
cipalities for themselves out of the wealthy East. We 
T^ • , have mentioned a few of the many causes 

Desire to -' 

win new which led to the Crusades, because these 
SeTirfdie alone explain the strange unanimity which 
East. £qj. Qj-^ce seized Europe. For the rest we 

must content ourselves with dwelling on the influence 
of the Normans upon the first Crusade. 

No king or emperor joined the first Crusade. It was 

rather a war of counts and dukes. Viewed from this 

aspect, it assumes the appearance of a great 

Normans on family coalition, and divides into four leading 

sade^'^ A interests. 

family (i) The Lorraine and Flemish interest, 

coa ition. headed by Godfrey of Bouillon, Duke of Lor- 
raine ; Robert, Count of Flanders ; and Baldwin of 
Hainault, his cousin. 

(2) The Vermandois party, headed by Hugh of Ver- 
mandois, brother of Philip, King of France, who, through 
his marriage with Adela, heiress of the old Counts of 
Vermandois, was closely connected with the Lorraine 
and Flemish interests. 

(3) The Norman party, headed by Bohemond, Prince 
of Tarento ; Tancred, his cousin ; and Robert, Duke of 
Family Normandy. 

alliances of p^ these were more or less united by 

the Nor- v. 

mans. tics of blood and interest. The Counts of 

Flanders were connected with the ducal houses of Nor- 
mandy and Apulia by marriage ; with the houses of 



I095-I099- " William Ricfiis. 195 

Boulogne and Vermandois by the tie of sympathy. The 
house of Boulogne had long had dealings with the Nor- 
mans of England. Eustace, the father of the Crusader, 
had been one of the Normanising party under Edward 
the Confessor, then a rebel under William I. Eustace, 
this man's son, had joined Robert against William 
Rufus, and was eventually to become the father-in-law 
of our King Stephen, the last of the Norman dynasty 
in England. The relations between Normandy and the 
south of Italy were no less close. No direct marriage 
indeed took place between the princely houses of Nor- 
mandy and Italy ; but Count Roger married a distant 
relation of the Conqueror. The real connexion, however, 
is to be found in the intercourse between the two coun- 
tries. This is illustrated by the similarity of the govern- 
ment of Sicily with that of Norman England. We find 
a justiciary and a constable mentioned in Sicily as early 
as the middle of the twelfth century, and the Sicilian 
kings also had an exchequer, the idea of which was 
probably borrowed from Normandy or England. But 
through the Church lay the chief bond of union. Many 
a Norman and English ecclesiastic wandered south, and 
became bishop in Apulia or Sicily. The architecture of 
Normandy may have borrowed the pointed arch from 
the Saracen buildings of Sicily ; while in the southern 
churches we easily detect the Norman mouldings and 
tracery. Norman monasteries were founded by Guiscard 
in Italy, as dependencies of St. Evroul. Hence a con- 
stant intercourse between Normandy and Italy, and from 
the chronicle of Ordericus Vitalis, the monk of Evroul 
we learn much of the Norman doings in Italy, and the 
Norman view of the Crusades. 

Thus, then, the first Crusade may under one aspect be 
called a great Norman family alliance ; and though the 
Lorraine interest was greatest at Jerusalem, that of the 



196 The Normans in Etirope. a.d/ 

Normans of Italy affected in no slight manner the cha- 
racter of the expedition itself. 

The members of this family coalition severally repre- 
sent the various types of crusaders and the divergent 
T esofthe motives under which they acted. Godfrey of 
various cru- Bouillon and Tancred of Sicily are fair repre- 
racte^.^ ^ scntatives of the religious devotees who entered 
Bouillon °^ upon the Crusades as others had gone upon pil- 
and Tancred grimagcs, in the simple spirit of devotion, and 

^^^ ^■' yearned to win back the Sepulchre from the 
sacrilegious hands of the Turks. Robert of Normandy 
best represents the wild spirit of adventure which found 
so congenial a field in the crusading wars. His im- 
Robert of patience of restraint had led him to quarrel 
Normandy, ^f^\\\x his father. His carelessness had 
brought Normandy into anarchy and reduced himself to 
penury. And now, with the same indifference to the 
future, he had pledged his ducal crown of Normandy 
to his brother, and went on a crusade, not to win a 
dominion in the East, but only to satisfy his roaming 
love of knight-errantry, eventually to return once more 
to trouble Normandy with his bad government, and 
finally to end his foolish life in durance at Cardiff. In 
Bohemond Bohemond we see the type of those who 
uses Cru- joined the Crusade for motives of self- 
continua- aggrandisement. To Bohemond, a calm and 
tionofhis q^qX^ politician, politics stood in the place of 

wars against r 1 r r 

the Eastern reliffion : he used the relisrious enthusiasm of 



™^^'^^' Others to carry out his long-cherished schemes 

of conquest. The eldest son of Robert Guiscard, he had 
taken a prominent part in his father's wars against the 
Eastern Empire. On his death, Guiscard left Apulia to 
his second son Roger, while to Bohemond was granted 
the principality of Tarento and Bari, with the traditions 
of his father's exploits — the hope of winning an empire 



.. 



I099. 



William Rufus. 197 



in Dalmatia, Epirus, and Thessaly. To Bohemond, 
therefore, the Crusade appeared as an opportunity of 
pressing his pohtical schemes, and of gaining a princi- 
pahty, if not in Thessaly, at least somewhere in the East, 
perhaps even of winning Constantinople itself If we 
may believe the chronicler William of Malmesbury, he 
urged Urban to the Crusade for this very purpose ; and 
his future policy shows clearly that he cared nothing for 
the success of the ostensible objects of the Crusade. 

Such were the many-sided interests which, for a short 
time united, led to the first Crusade. Into the Frankish 
details we cannot enter. Suffice to say, that je'J-usaiem^ 
the close of the eleventh century found a 1099. 
Frankish kingdom founded on the shores of Bouillon," 
Palestine : Godfrey of Bouillon King of Teru- ?-"^^ ^^ 

■' _ o J Jerusalem. 

salem; Baldwin, his brother, at Edessa, in Baldwin 
Mesopotamia ; Bohemond, with a semi-inde- Boheirmnd 
pendent principality, at Antioch ; and Tancred, ^ Antioch. 
holding the city of Caipha on the seaboard. Caipha. 

Thus, then, with the first Crusade the Norman power 
reached its climax. The Norman not only ruled in 
England and Normandy, Apulia and Sicily, but had 
spread to the far East, and was the first to plant his foot 
on the shores of Palestine, where no European had ruled 
since the days of Heraclius (a.d. 628). 

Meanwhile in England Rufus had been enjoying the 
material prosperity so often permitted to the wicked. He 
had triumphed over the Scots and the Welsh. Success of 
The last rebellion of his nobles had been Rufus. 
ruthlessly crushed. The Church was completely at his 
feet. Anselm had been driven from England in 1097. 
Thomas, Archbishop of York, who enjoyed a precarious 
greatness in consequence of the exile of Anselm, was on his 
death-bed, and William had in his hands all the domains 
of the archbishopric of Canterbury, those of the bishoprics 



198 TJie Normans in Europe. a.d. 

of Winchester and Salisbury, together with those of twelve 
or more of the richest abbeys of England. Freed thus 
His open from the restraint of those who would have 
profligacy. bccn his censors, he openly spoke of turning 
all ecclesiastical property into fiefs, declared that he would 
become a Jew if they could beat the Christians in argu- 
ment, and daily became more reckless and profane. 
' Never day dawned,' says his chronicler, '• but he rose a 
worse man than he had lain down ; never sun set but he 
lay down a worse man than he had risen.' Yet, in spite 
of his wickedness, he had energy and ability. Had these 
been only directed to better ends, England might have 
blessed instead of cursing his name. As it was, the feudal 
nobility were at least kept down ; the incorporation of 
Cumberland with England, which may be dated from his 
reign, as well as the conquest of South Wales, were lasting 
additions to the strength of his country ; and the Tower of 
London, completed by him, and the noble Hall of West^ 
minster, built at this date, still stand as memorials of his 
greatness. Abroad he was equally successful. Anxious 
to gain the allegiance of Normandy against 
padfie^s^ ^" the return of Robert, his government there, 
Normandy, jj^ contrast to that of England, was dis- 
creet and moderate. Order and justice, both neglected 
by his careless brother, were restored, and the country 
flourished. The vacant abbeys and sees were all filled 
up. The royal domains, which had been dissipated by 
the extravagance of Robert, were restored, and the Nor- 
Successfui man barons who held lands in Normandy 
PhiU^^eTf"^'^ and England quietly acquiesced in an undi- 
France. vided allegiance. Strong in Normandy, he 

waged a successful war against Philip of France, and 
soon gained the castle of Gisors, an important outpost 
surrendered by Robert, Maine indeed he never gained. 



I099. 



Willi a m . R ufics. 199 



This, the first conquest outside the duchy made by 
William I., had never acquiesced in the Nor- practical 
man rule. Profiting by the disturbed condition indepen- 
of Normandy under Robert, it had once more Maine. 
rebelled, under Helie de la Fleche, nephew of i°96-io99. 
Count Herbert, and renewed its allegiance to the Count 
of Anjou. Though Rufus once retookMaine, his authority 
was never recognised, and the county was not secured to 
England till the reign of Henry I. 

In spite, however, of this repulse, the power of Rufus 
increased day by day, until, puffed up by his successes, he 
spoke of conquering Ireland and claiming the throne of 
France, even of taking Rome itself. 

From these ambitious dreams he was suddenly called 
away by an ignominious death. Among the acts of his 
father none had caused more misery or stirred more 
deeply the heart of the English against him than his cruel 
clearing of the New Forest for the deer he loved ^^xr^d of 
so well. Under his son, the Forest laws and Rufus 

C3.11SCQ DV" 

courts had been used as engines of tyranny, the Forest 
There arbitrary custom prevailed. The courts ^^^s- 
were presided over by special officials, who were irre- 
sponsible, except to the king, and laws were drawn up 
rather for the protection of the beasts of chase than of 
the king's subjects. On one occasion Rufus had refused 
to accept the verdict of the ordeal by which fifty English- 
men had freed themselves from the accusation of poach- 
ing, declaring that God was no judge of offences against 
the forest laws. Cursed by such laws as these, the 
fair glades of the forest were looked upon as r^^ie New 
haunted, and fatal to the Conqueror's family. Forest 
There his son Richard had died a mysterious Conqueror's 
death, and there another Richard, son of ^^^^^y- 
Robert, had fallen at the beginning of the year by an ill- 



200 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

aimed bolt. Numerous portents warned the king that 
his end was near. Even he himself had been terrified 
by an awful dream. But William heeded not : ^ Do they 
Death of think me an Englishman to put off a journey 
William for an old wife's fancy ?' he cried ; and from a 

New Forest, last wild debauch, he went forth into the forest 
iioo. ^Q j^jg Whether he was slain by the acci- 

dental aim of Walter Tyrrel, or by falling on the point 
of an arrow as he stooped over his prey, or by the hands 
of some of those half-starved peasants whose homes had 
been destroyed to yield him sport, none can say. He died 
unloved and unblessed. His body, dragged 
honoured into Winchester by one sorry horse, found 
burial. indeed a grave amongst the old kings of Eng- 

land, but received no Christian burial ; and when, a short 
time after, the tower of Winchester fell, men said it was 
a sign of God's wrath, because his cursed body had found 
a restingplace within that sacred pile. 



CHAPTER XVI. 

HENRY I. IIOO-II35. 

During the reign of Rufus, Henry had lived partly in 
Normandy, partly in England. In Normandy he held 
Early life of ^^^ castlc of Domfront and the Cotentin, 
Henry I. which he had bought from the needy Robert. 
Enjoying here almost independent power over one-third 
of the duchy, he had spent his time in pleasure with his 
mistress, Nesta, princess of South Wales, and in literary 
pursuits, by which he stands in marked contrast to the rest 
of his family. Thus occupied, and in occasional visits 
to England to join in the pleasures of the chase, he had 
taken little part in the quarrels between his brothers, but 



IIOO. 



Henry I. 201 



waited with well-concealed impatience until the time 
should come for the fulfilment of his father's pro- 
phecy. And now the day had come. He had been 
hunting in the New Forest when his brother ^^ , 

, .° T ^ , . , He hastens 

was killed. On hearmg the news, he rode at to Winches- 
once to Winchester to secure the royal treasure, seizes the 
and claim the crown ; and so opportunely had royal trea- 

sure 

the death of Rufus happened, that some even 
whispered that the murder had been done at his insti- 
gation. 

Robert, having failed to gain the crown of Jerusalem, 
was now on his way home, bringing with him his Italian 
bride, Sibylla of Conversana. A few days more, 
and he would have been again in Normandy Robert 
to demand the crown by the terms of the treaty crusade 
of Caen (lOQi). But Robert still was absent ; Henry 

, . , , , T crowned 

the title to the crown was not yet hereditary. King of 
it was held, therefore, that an interregnum England. 
ensued upon the death of the king. From the last king's 
death till the proclamation of the new king's peace, all 
law was at an end, and none could be punished for their 
lawless deeds. In the face of the universal hatred which 
Rufus had inspired, and the many smouldering elements 
of anarchy which existed, this was a forcible argument in 
Henry's favour, and his promptitude and energy did the 
rest. 

In vain William of Breteuil pressed the claims of Robert 
in the interest of those Norman nobles who now as ever 
wished England and Normandy to be united j^^ Breteuil 
on account of the personal advantages to be in vain 
gained thereby. He was overruled. The claim of 
form of election was gone through by the ^o^^'^'^- 
barons who were on the spot, and Henry hastened to 
London to secure that important town, and to press on 
his coronation. 



202 Tiie Normans in Enrope. a.d. 

Conscious of the weakness of his title, Henry 
shrewdly saw that the crown was to be won and held only 
Henr ^^ ready conciliation of all classes. Hence 

conciliates he forthwith granted a charter, which was 

3.11 clS-SSCS 

His the first granted by the Norman kings, and was 

Charter. considered so valuable that it formed the 

basis for the future Magna Carta of the reign of John. 
' Know ye,' the charter begins, ' that by the mercy of 
God and the common counsel of the barons of the whole 
realm of England, I have been crowned king.' Having 
thus acknowledged the elective character of his crown, 
Feudal ^^ proceeds to specify the abuses of the late 

clauses. reign and to forbid them for the future. The 

barons are conciliated by the restriction of the feudal dues 
and aids. The reliefs are to be moderate ; the lords' 
rights of wardship and marriage are defined. Widows 
are to be allowed their right of dower. Tenants by knight 
service are freed from all demands except service in the 
field ; and the barons are allowed to bequeath their per- 
sonal property by will. 

The lower vassals are conciliated by the promise that 
their over-lords shall do the same to them as the king did 
to the tenants-in-chief. 

To the people peace and good coinage are promised. 
The fines are to be moderated, the arrears of debt due to 
Non-feudal the crown remitted. The laws of Edward the 
clauses. Confcssor, by which is meant the old institu- 

tions, shall be re-established, with such amendments as 
had been made by his father, with the consent of his 
barons. But forests as they were in the Conqueror's 
The forests time are retained with the consent of the 
Eccleslasti- barons. To the Church he promises that 
cal clauses, he will not keep the property of vacant bene- 
caiied. fices, and that he will free them from all 

unjust exactions. Nor was this all. Anselm was imme- 



IIOO-IIOI. 



Heniy I. 203 



diately recalled, the bishoprics were filled up by good 
appointments, and the oppressive minister Ranulf Flam- 
bard, to whom much of the misery of the past reign 
was attrilDuted, was called to account and Fiambard 
imprisoned. Finally, Henry's marriage with ™P"soned. 
Matilda, daughter of Malcolm of Scotland, STMaSda 
niece of Edgar ^theling, and thus heiress of Scotland, 
of the Saxon line, was looked upon as a pledge that 
he meant to rule as an English national king. 

In these conciliatory measures of Henry I. we see 
how fortunate it was for England that the crown was not 
yet hereditary, and the value of these early ^^^^ of the 
disputed successions. Had the sons of the elective 
Conqueror succeeded him by strict hereditary P""^^P'^- 
right, the crown would have been absolutely despotic. 
But as it was, each king was forced to lean upon the 
people, to impose restrictions on his own irresponsibility, 
and to acknowledge his people's rights and his own duties. 

The Norman barons, however, resented this English 
policy ; especially were they indignant at Henry's mar- 
riage with Matilda. They called the couple stj^^^xt as- 
sneeringly ^Goodrich and Godiva,' and, as- listed by the 
sisted by Ranulf Fiambard, who had escaped baronage, 
from the Tower, they invited Robert to claim En^f^nd 
his own. The invasion was skilfully managed. "oi- 
and many of the barons, headed by Robert of Belesme, 
Count of Alengon in France and Earl of Robert's 
Shrewsbury in England, and William of War- supporters. 
enne Earl of Surrey, flocked to his standard when he 
landed at Portsmouth. 

But the English stood true to Henry. Among the 
barons, Robert, Count of M client, afterwards Henry's 
Earl of Leicester, his brother the Earl of War- supporters. 
wick, and Roger Bigod supported Henry's cause. Anselm 
threatened the Church's excommunication, and Robert 



204 ^■^^^ Normans m Europe, a.d. 

fearing to try the chance of a battle, consented to a peace, 
Reconci- ^^ which he once more resigned the crown of 
nation. England, and contented himself with the full 

Robert re- . . ^ ^ 

signs the posscssion of Normandy and 3,000 marks a 
crown. year. The quarrel which afterwards ensued 

Renewed between the two brothers was no longer about 
quarrel. ^]-^g crown, but about the power of enforcing 

obedience on those Norman barons who held property in 
both countries. In its course it clearly illustrated the 
absolute necessity either that Normandy and England 
should be under the same ruler, or that the Norman 
barons should choose whether they would be English or 
Norman subjects, and cease to pay a divided allegiance. 
If every feudal rebel could fall back upon his possessions 
in Normandy when driven from England, and there pre- 
pare a new rebellion against the king, there could be no 
hope for the peace of either country. 

No sooner therefore had Robert retired than Henry 
turned upon the barons who had defied his authority. 
Henry re- William, Count of Mortain, who claimed the 
duces the earldom of Kent as nephew and heir of Odo 
of Bayeux, and Ivo of Grantmesnil, who had 
attempted to introduce the right of private war into 
England, were driven from the realm. Robert of Be- 
lesme. Earl of Shrewsbury, who had long been one of the 
most factious of the nobles, held out in his castles of 
Shrewsbury, Arundel, and Bridgnorth, until Henry 
marched against him with the whole force of the nation, 
and forced him to fly and retire to Normandy! 

The joy of the English at the fall of these nobles is 
seen in the triumph of the chronicler Orderic Vitalis : 
Joy of the ' Rcjoicc, all England and King Henry, and 
Enghsh. thank the Lord God, for you became a free 
king on the day when you banished Robert of Belesme.' 

To all these exiles Normandy, under the weak 



II04-II06. Henry I. 205 

Robert, offered a tempting refuge. Joining with the dis- 
affected nobles there, they reduced the coun- Normandy 
try to a state of utter anarchy. The people ^^^ refuge 
filled the churches with their property to save exiles. Con- 
it from the marauding barons. The power of anarchy 
Robert was at an end, and he himself was *^^^''^- 
plundered by his rebellious vassals so that he often lacked 
bread to eat, and was forced to lie in bed for want of 
clothes to wear. The cruelties of Robert of Belesme 
surpass belief. He is said to have impaled men and 
women, and out of wantonness to have plucked out the 
eyes of a child as he held it at the font. 

Henry accordingly interfered, and complaining that 
his brother had broken his treaty by sheltering the 
exiles from England, he invaded Normandy. 
He was bought off by the cession of the Henry' re- 
County of Evreux, but two years afterwards ^°d in'v^ades 
he again landed in Normandy to win the Normandy. 
battle of Tinchebrai, where his brother and Battle of 
William Count of Mortain fell into his hands, ^'i^chebrai. 
The Count of Mortain was blinded, and Robert, sent a 
prisoner to the castle of Cardiff, spent the Robert im- 
rest of his useless, aimless life in honourable casde^of^" 
captivity. Robert of Belesme, who in 1113 Cardiff. 
fell into Henry's hands, also remained a captive till his 
death. 

Thus once more were England and Normandy united. 
Henry apparently did not assume the title of duke until his 
brother's death, at the age of eighty, in 1134. 
But from the battle of Tinchebrai he under- an'd Eng-^ 
took the government of the duchv. His land united. 

° • Henrys 

policy there forms a contrast to that pursued policy in 
in England. In England he confiscated the °'^™^" ^'" 
estates of all who rebelled. In Normandy, with a few 
exceptions, he contented himself with garrisoning their 



2o6 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

castles lest by more extreme measures he might throw 
the Norman nobles to the side of his jealous suzerain the 
king of France. Thus when Robert of Belesme died, 
he allowed his son William Talvas to succeed to the 
Norman estates of his father. By these wise measures 
he reduced the nobles to obedience and the country to 
peace, and, in spite of several wars with the King of 
France, Normandy enjoyed a security which it had never 
known under the restless, careless hand of Robert. 

At this time Wales demanded the attention of Henry. 
Constant border warfare had continued there between the 
Henry and Wclsh and the Lorcls on the Marches, and the 
Wales. Welsh had joined the rebellion of Belesme. 

The means adopted by Henry to increase English in- 
fluence in Wales were twofold. First he attempted to 
subordinate the Welsh Church to Canterbury by pressing 
his nominees into the Sees and forcing them to receive 
consecration from Canterbury, a policy which was deeply 
resented by the Bishop of St. David's who claimed metro- 
politan authority. Secondly, he established in Pembroke- 
Flemi h shire a colony of Flemings who at this time 

colony in were flocking to England, driven from Flan- 
sWlre/° ^' ders by one of those inundations of the sea 



iiii. 



which' occurred periodically in their low-lying 
home. This settlement, near Tenby, did something to 
introduce the knowledge of the woollen trade and agri- 
culture into Wales, and formed a nucleus of order and 
advance. But insurrections still continued, and Wales 
was never quiet until entirely subdued by Edward I. 

Meanwhile in England Henry had been engaged in 
Q 1 -th ^ quarrel with Anselm. Since the reign of 
Anseim William I. a death struggle had been carried 

invesdtures, on between Pope and Emperor on the ques- 
iioo. |--Qj^ Qf investitures. The claim to invest the 

bishops with the ring and crozier, the ecclesiastical sym- 



I100-II06. Henry I. 207 

bols of office, had formed a crucial point in the system of 
Gregory VII. The Church was to be free from the 
secular power, and dependent on the Pope. But how 
could this be, how could simony be checked, and a 
recurrence of the shameful abuses of the reign of Rufus 
prevented, unless the Pope had the undisputed right of 
thus confirming or annulling elections .^ This was the 
papal view ; and Anselm, coming fresh from the Council 
of Rome where lay investiture had been condemned, 
refused either to accept the symbols of his office from lay 
hands or to pay the homage demanded by the king. When 
the demand was made, Anselm referred to the canons of 
the Church. Henry answered, ^ What have I to do with a 
Roman canon ? No one shall remain in my land who 
will not do me homage.^ Cherishing the customs of 
his father, he was determined not to abate a Henry main- 
jot of his authority over the Church ; he [o|^^o^%^-i' 
would exercise that authority more decently Ham i. 
than his brother, but that was all. Anselm, true to his 
papal views, held to his refusal. Unsatisfactory nego- 
tiations ensued with Paschal II., who was anxious, if 
possible, to prevent a quarrel with a new foe until he 
had humbled the Emperor ; and Anselm Anselm 
once more went into exile, to meet only with -^^^^" ?,°^^ 

-' ^ into exile, 

lukewarm support from the Pope. In 1 105, noo. 
however, Henry, anxious to gain assistance in his Nor 
man war, and fearing the threatened excommunication, 
once more recalled the archbishop, and the jr^ ■ 
following year saw the question settled, as called, and 
it was sixteen years afterwards between Pope compro-^ ^^'^ 
and Emperor at the Diet of Worms. By ™^^^^' "°^- 
this compromise the Pope retained the right of in- 
vesting with the ring and crozier, while the king was 
to confer the temporalities of the see and receive the 
oath of fealty from the bishop. Had the king gained the 



20 8 The Norinans in Europe. a.d. 

exclusive right of investiture, the independence of the 
T., Church would have been endans^ered : she 

Ihe compro- ^ ° ' 

miseagood would have become feudalised and subser- 
vient, and thus lost the secret of her moral 
influence. Had the king surrendered all, the Church 
Would have formed a separate power within the realm, 
owing allegiance to a distant superior, and have gained 
a freedom dangerous to the State. As it was. Pope and 
King obtained all they could reasonably desire : the 
king was secured in his just right as feudal lord, the 
bishops could not deny their allegiance in temporal con- 
cerns or rebel without breaking their oath of fealty. 
The Pope could check the growth of simony, and enjoy 
the supremacy over his clergy as head of the Western 
Church. The Church, connected with the rest of Chris- 
tendom and the ecclesiastical centre at Rome, retained her 
power and vitality. The quarrel had been 

Importance r i • i t i • r 

of Anselm's useful m Other ways. In the resistance of 
opposition. Anselm to Rufus and Henry we see the 
first constitutional opposition to the irresponsible power 
of the king. By it the king was taught that there was a 
limit to his power, an authority above him with which 
he must reckon, and the people learnt their right and 
duty of resisting arbitrary rule. 

The general ecclesiastical policy of the king was 
marked by the same spirit of compromise. The Pope 
had long claimed the right of sending legates into the 
Subsequent country as his representatives. These legates 
ecclesiastical jj^^ ^^^ interfere with the ordinary duties of 

policy of -' 

Henry I. the archbishop, but were invested for the time 

with the extraordinary powers enjoyed by the Pope alone. 
In virtue of this they took precedence of the archbishop, 
superintended the ecclesiastical synods, and administered 
the more important affairs of the Church. This right was 
not denied ; but Henry, conscious that the due indepen- 



II00-II06. Henry I . 209 

dence of the Church might thus be encroached upon, in- 
sisted that his consent should first be obtained before the 
legate couldland. The synod might be called whenthearch- 
bishop chose, but the king's sanctionmustbeobtainedbefore 
they could meet. The chapters were to enjoy their right of 
election ; but the election must be in the king's court, and 
after his co7tge d'elire. In every point Henry maintained 
the principles of his father's customs, and asserted his 
position as ruler of the national Church ; but jjenry I 
within these limits the freedom of the Church asserts the 
and the papal supremacy were allowed, and in of the 
the exercise of his control Henry's conduct Sie^amhority 
was dictated not by caprice, as in the case of the 
of William Rufus, but by the dictates of a 
wise and consistent policy. Anselm did not long survive 
his return. The rest of his life was devoted Anselm 
to the administration of his See, and the celibacy on 
enforcement of the celibacy of the clergy. In the clergy. 
this he pursued a more rigorous course than Lanfranc. 
The married clergy were driven from office, and the act 
of marriage condemned as absolutely ^nful. But the 
national feeling was always against the papal view ; it was 
constantly evaded, and Anselm's attempt did not meet 
with complete success. He had been all along striving to 
establish the system of Hildebrand in England, a system 
which was distasteful to the English, and therefore he 
never entirely succeeded ; but in the reign of Rufus he had 
boldly stood forth as the champion of a higher morality 
against a wicked tyrant, and his opposition to Henry 
was marked by the same purity and singleness of motive. 
The ecclesiastical history of the reign is also marked 
by the foundation of two new sees, those of g^^^ ^^ g, 
Ely (1109) and Carlisle (1133), and the intro- andCariisle. 
duction of the Cistercian order of monks 
into England. This order, founded by an Englishman, 

M. H. P 



2IO The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

Stephen Harding, at Citeaux in Burgundy (1109), devoted 
themselves to agricultural pursuits, while the earlier 
orders had betaken themselves chiefly to the towns. 
The reign of Henry I, saw three of their monasteries 
established in England : those of Waverley in Surrey 
(11 28), Rievaux in Northumberland (i 131). and Fountains 
in Yorkshire (1132). In England the Cistercians be- 
came great sheep-farmers, and many of our most famous 
houses belonged to the order. 

No sooner was the question of investiture settled than 

Henry was called abroad. The possession of Normandy 

broug;ht Henry into immediate contact with 

Wars with 

France, France, where Lewis VI. was ruling, the first 

1111-1113. of those great princes to whom is due the ulti- 
mate overthrow of feudalism. As a boy he had been sent 
to the English court with sealed letters from his step- 
mother, in which Henry was requested to kill him. Henry 
had declined to do so, and thus had a claim to the grati- 
tude of his suzerain. But personal ties gave way to 
motives of public policy. The power of England threat- 
ened France, awd Lewis returned to the traditional policy 
of the French kings in supporting rebellions against the 
Louis VI overgrown power of his vassal. The state of 
supports the Normandy gave him the opportunity to in- 
v/iuiam terfere. The disaffected nobles disliked the 

^^'^'^^' firmness of Henr/s rule. The doubtful claim of 

Henry to supremacy over the Countiesof the Vexin,Evreux, 
and Alen^on, were fruitful causes of dispute. Fulk of Anjou, 
ever jealous of the Norman power, again 
claims ' claimed the supremacy of Maine on the death of 

Maine. Helie dela Fleche, who had acknowledged the 

right of Henry. Baldwin VII. of Flanders joined the coali- 
tion, and a pretender to the duchy was found in William 
Clito, son of Robert of Normandy. Success, however, 
smiled on Henry's anns. The Count of Anjou was 



IIII-III9. 



Henry I. 211 



bought off by the marriage of his daughter to William, 
Henry's only son. Robert of Belesme fell Prince Wii- 
into Henry's hands, and Lewis, defeated by ^^-^"[^/"^u' 
Theobald of Blois in the interests of Henry, daughter of 
submitted to the treaty of Gisors, by which Treaty of 
he abandoned the cause of William Chto, Gisors,iii3 

' Alliances 

and acknowledged Henry's lordship over with the 
Brittany, Alengon, and Maine. Henry then HenTy V. 
strengthened his position by the marriage of ^^^ ^"'^- 
his illegitimate daughter to Conan of Brittany, Prince 
and of his legitimate daughter Matilda to the acknow- 
Emperor Henry V., while the acknowledgment ledged heir. 
of his son William as his heir was wrested from the 
barons of England and N ormandy. 

War, indeed, broke out again, and once more Baldwin 
of Flanders, Fulk of Anjou, and Lewis sup- Renewed 
ported the cause of the son of Duke Robert, war, 1115. 
But Henry was again successful. Baldwin was killed, Fulk 
was again won over, and a skirmish at Brenne- 
ville, in which Lewis was defeated, brought Brenneville, 
the second war to a close. ^^^^' 

At this moment the death of Henry's son William 
threatened to undo the painful work of years. As 
he was returning in triumph to England, the 
ship in which William sailed Avas wrecked off Prince 
Barfleur. The prince had managed to gain a Wiiham. 
boat and pushed off from the sinking ship, but the cries 
of his sister recalled him to the wreck. The boat was 
capsized by the rush of the despairing crew, and one alone 
survived to bring the news to Henry. Crushed by this 
sudden loss, Henry is said never to have sm.iled again. 

The death of the Prince was a severe domestic afflic- 
tion j but that was not all. He was Henry's Fatalresults 
only son, and no woman had yet ruled in of his death. 
England ; thus the hopes of seeing his family established 



212 The Normans ill Etir Ope. a.d. 

in England- received a cruel blow. The ties of interest 
FulkV.again which bound Fulk of Anjou to Henry were 
wmiam destroyed by the death of William, who had 

Ciito, 1124. been married to the daughter of the Angevin 
count, and Fulk once more took up the cause of William 
Clito. His daughter Sibylla was affianced to the pre- 
tender. Lewis VI. again threatened to join the coalition, 
and Henry was forced to engage in another war in Nor- 
mandy. But fortune favoured him once more. 
FulkV ^ ^. \ . ^ . , . . 

resigns his Fulk shortly alter resigned his estates to his 

hiTson"and ^Idcst SOU, and, marrying the heiress of the 
accepts the kingdom of Jerusalem, accepted that precarious 
Jerusalem. crown. The rcbcls were discomfited, and 
wmiam ^ three years afterwards the death of William 
Clito, 1128. Clito rid Henry of the only competitor for the 
ancTMaine duchy of Normandy. Maine, which had been a 
Britt^an source of continual trouble to William and his 

renews her SOUS, was definitely secured, and Henry's rights 
as lord over Brittany were acknowledged. 
The prophecy of William was now fulfilled, and Henry 
enjoyed a larger dominion than that enjoyed by the Con- 
queror himself Normandy and Maine were 
Henry's at last definitely united to England. These 

dommions. Continental dominions forrned part of the 
English kingdom until they were finally lost in the reign 
of John. But this triumph, though increasing the power 
of the English king, was not a benefit to the English people. 
It once more made England part of a great Continental 
kingdom, to which her own interests were likely to be 
sacrificed. It gave the nobles increased power, the results 
of which were seen in the succeeding reigns. During that 
of Stephen, for instance, the long wars were due chiefly 
to the nobles who hoped thereby to increase their inde- 
pendence, and in the reign of Henry II. the power they 
had thus gained was once more used to rebel against the 
strong anti-feudal government of the king. Lastly, Eng- 



II24-II35- Henry I. 213 

lish nationality could never be established until England 
was split off from Normandy and the Continent, and left 
alone to work out her national life for herself. 

Secure at last in the possession of Normandy and Eng- 
land, Henry now turned his attention to the question of 
the succession. Matilda, his wife, had died Henry 
in 1 1 18. He had afterwards married Ade- attempts to 

secure the 

lais of Louvain. His new wife, however, bore succession 
him no child, and it remained to secure the Empress 
succession of Matilda his daughter, who, on Matilda, 
the death of her husband, the Emperor Henry V., had 
returned a widow to her father's court. The barons 
were ordered to swear allegiance to her, and shortly 
afterwards, anxious to secure the alliance of Anjou, 
Henry married her to Geoffrey, the son of Fulk. „, . 
By this means he hoped to win the friendship married to 
of the house of Anjou, always so hostile to the o/Anjtm. * 
Norman power, as he had done before by the ^^^^• 
marriage of his son William. But the barons declared that 
their oath of allegiance had been given on the promise that 
Matilda should not marry a foreigner without their con- 
sent, and the hereditary jealousy of the Normans for the 
Angevins caused many of them to abandon Matilda for 
the cause of Stephen on Henry's death. 

Henry was still in Normandy arranging the disputes 
caused by the marriage when he died, it is tt 

• -i r • 1 -1 r 1- Henry dies, 

said, from eatmg too heartily of a dish of Dec. 1135. 
lampreys. 

Amid the constant wars which had disturbed his reign, 

Henry had found time to improve the adminis- Henry's ad- 

tration of the country ; and his reign of thirtv- ^inistra- 

r 11 1 r TT T% i^ioii- Its 

six years lorms a prelude to that of Henry II. relation to 

in this as in many other respects. In fact, ibmL^d' 
the three reigns of William I., Henry I., and Henry 11. 
Henry II., the three great organizers of feudal England, 
stand closely together. 



214 The Normans in Eui'ope. a.d. 

In Henry's quarrel with Anselm the same principles 
were involved as in William's dispute with the Pope, and 
these were again to appear in the quarrel of Becket and 
Church Henry II., though the combatants had some- 

pohcy. what changed their ground. 

We have seen the quarrels between the king and his 
feudal nobles, which had begun in the reign of William, 
Antlfeudal Continued in that of Henry I. The reign of 
policy. Stephen undid much of Henry's work which 

was left for Henry 11. to complete. In this struggle the 
kings, in spite of the arbitrary character of their rule, had 
been striving for the good of the country ; the feudal 
nobles aiming to establish their independence at the cost 
of the nation's welfare. It v/as well for England that 
her early kings were so strong, for else she might have 
suffered from the evils of Continental feudalism, and her 
history might have been a counterpart to that of France. 

In the administration of justice and in the organization 

of the executive power, the same connexion between the 

reigns is seen, the same anti-feudal tendency 

Administra- , . . .,, . . , 

tion of appears, and one reign is illustrative of the 

justice. other. Henry's father had continued the 

Anglo-Saxon local courts of the Hundred and the 
Shire. During the reign of William Rufus they had 
been suffered to fall into disuse. The nobles probably 
had tried to encroach upon their jurisdiction or to get rid 
of them entirely, and under RanulfFlambard they had been 
used for the purposes of fiscal extortion, and thus became 
objects of suspicion to the people themselves. These 
Local courts ^ourts Henry now revived, and promised that 
revived. for the future, when he had need of money, 

he would not demand it at the ordinary 

Centralisa- . , , • ,1 

tion in- scssious, but summon these courts especially 

creased. £qj. ^^ purpose. The local courts thus re 

vived, it was necessary to draw them closer to the central 



IIOO-II35. Henry I. 215 

court of justice — the Curia Regis introduced by- 
William his father. The means resorted to were these. 
The duties of the Curia Regis and its financial committee 
were systematised, the offices of the justiciary and those 
of his staff of justices organized. By his circuits to the 
local courts their dependence was secured. Already 
the justices, his subordinates, began to take his place, 
and making their eyres (circuits) chiefly to superintend 
the collection of the royal dues, and therefore in their 
office as Barons of the Exchequer, led the way for the 
definite establishment of Justices in Eyre by Henry II. 
In some cases the justices were made sheriffs of several 
counties, and thus presiding in the regular sessions of the 
Shire courts, connected them closely with the central 
court of the king. To carry on this work new officers 
were required, and Henry, neglecting the old Creation of 
nobility who had, by their continual rebellions, mii^rterial 
forfeited all title to his confidence, turned to nobility. 
the lower ranks of the noble order. Thence he created a 
class of ministerial families who furnished the sheriffs of 
the counties, the justices of the Curia Regis, and the barons 
of the exchequer, and greatly facilitated Henry's policy. 
They were, indeed, unpopular, but for that very reason 
they setved Henry's purpose all the better. They were 
bound by interest to the crown ; they were not too power- 
ful to be brought to justice, and their acts were closely 
criticised by nobles and by people. The most important 
of these new ministers was Roger, Bishop of 
Salisbury. Henry had first met him when a Bishop of 
poor priest in Normandy. Attracted, as the Salisbury. 
story runs, by the wit which the poor priest had shown in 
discerning his impatience to hasten to the hunt, and 
satisfying it by shortening the service, Henry made him his 
steward and chaplain. Here his great powers of adminis- 
tration were displayed, and finally he rose to be Bishop of 



2i6 The Norma7is in Europe. a.d. 

Salisbury and justiciary. The choice was wisely made. 
To Roger is chiefly due the fiscal organization of the 
office and of the Curia Regis, the control of which 
remained in his family for nearly a century. 

While thus advancing the administration of justice 
and introducing order and routine, Henry was not re- 
c\\ to gardless of other interests. His charters to 
towns. the towns mark a step in the growth of 

municipal life, and a wise recognition of their claims. 
His police, too, was good. The system of 
Police. frankpledge was maintained and developed. 

By this everyone had to find a surety ; if he was a vassal, 
his lord was answerable ; if a freeman, the association of 
freemen to whom he belonged. The false coiners were 
heavily punished, and a new coinage issued. 

In every way the reign of Henry I. was a gain to 
England. It marks a distinct advance in the growth of 
national life, and in the progress of arbitrary but good 
administrative government ; and it is to Henry's credit 
that he has earned the title of the Lion of Righteousness. 

But withal Henry was an irresponsible despot, and 
loved to be so. With all his father's military and 
Character of administrative sagacity, he was more cruel and 
Henry I. perhaps even more tyrannical. He refused to 
give up the forests ; those who dared gainsay him or 
rebel against him were punished with merciless rigour, 
and Henry would listen to no will but his own. 

His great judicial reforms are probably to be attributed 
to no higher motive than the love of order and the desire 
to increase his revenue by the fines of the courts. Hence 
his heavy taxation, a continual source of lament in the 
chronicles of the reign. ' The manifold taxes never 
ceased. He who had any property was bereaved of it by 
heavy taxes, and he who had none starved with hunger.' 
His wars in Normandy, his wars against his nobles, 



IIOO-II35. Henry I. 217 

all are to be referred to his overmastering selfishness. 
But, fortunately for England, that selfishness was clear- 
sighted and far-sighted, and his own private aims 
tallied with the interests of the nation. The nobles were 
his enemies ; he destroyed them, and in doing so 
destroyed the enemies of the nation. Anarchy was hate- 
ful to him ; he substituted the reign of routine, and thus 
prepared the way for law, which might in time itself set a 
limit to royal irresponsibility. 

Thus, while the people could not love him, they re- 
spected and they feared him, and this accounts for the 
varying characters left of him by the chroniclers. ' Men 
thought differently about him,' says Henry of Huntingdon, 
' and after he was dead spoke their minds : — some spoke 
of splendour, wisdom, prudence, wealth, and victories — 
some of cruelty, avarice, and lust.' The lower classes 
were very miserable throughout his reign ; the constant 
wars rendered taxation necessary ; a series of bad har- 
vests and stormy seasons made the burden heavier. 

Henry, in spite of the support given him by the 
English, was at heart a foreigner. No Englishman found 
a place amongst his ministers. No Englishman found 
preferment in the Church. The two nations were gra- 
dually uniting, so that in the reign of Henry H. we are 
told it was difficult to distinguish between them ; but 
yet the English found no recognition of their claims at 
the hand of their Norman king. 

And yet, while the English complained, they instinc- 
tively supported the king, acknowledged that he sought for 
peace, and saw that their only hope lay in strengthening 
the royal power and thereby crushing the feudal nobility. 

'■ Inflexible in the rigour of justice, he kept his native 
people in quiet and his barons according to their deserts,' 
says William of Malmesbury; while Henry of Huntingdonr 
tells us ' that in the evil times that followed, the very 



21 8 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

acts of tyranny or of royal wilfulness seemed in compari- 
son with the worse state of things present most excellent.' 

Henry was the last of those great Norman kings 
who, with all their vices, their cruelty, and lust, displayed 
great talents of organization and adaptation, guided Eng- 
land with a wise if a strong hand through the days of her 
youth, and by their instinctive though selfish love of order 
paved the way for the ultimate rise of a more stable yet a 
freer government. 

That, however, was yet in the womb of the future, and 
the Norman period closes in the anarchy of Stephen's reign. 

Of that reign we do not intend to treat. It forms 
rather the prelude to the reign of Henry II. The Norman 
era really ends with Henry I., for Stephen was only a 
Norman by the spindle side, as was Henry II. the 
Angevin, and throughout the reign all constitutional 
history is at a standstill. 

It is a period unexampled in English history, a 
period during which England suffered all the ills of Con-' 
tinental feudalism. 

Amidst the anarchy of the civil war, the nobles 
covered the country with their castles, set authority at 
defiance, fostered the continuance of discord for their 
own ends, and strove to establish their selfish indepen- 
dence. 

In the misery which ensued, the lower classes, both 
Norman and English, were learning their identity of in- 
Beneficial terest against such men as these, with whom 
the^civil^ they felt that no truce could be kept. Pain- 
war, fully but surely they were drawn together into 
a close national unity, and to an intense yearning for 
peace which led them one and all to welcome the strong 
rule of Henry II., and any government which might 
crush out for ever this hateful Continental feudalism. 
Thus the reign of Stephen, though it closes the Norman 



II35- 



Henry I. 2ig 



period in sorrow and shame, was yet a valuable discipline 
for the country, and formed a secure basis for the reforms 
of Henry II., who took up the work where Henry I. 
had left it, and completed it. 

We have now traced the course of that great Scandi- 
navian exodus, which, beginning in the ninth century, 
spread over the whole of Europe. Having Review of 
briefly sketched the fortunes of the less im- '^^ period. 
portant branches, we have devoted especial attention to 
the settlements in France, which assumed the specific name 
of Norman. After following their fortunes in France we 
have accompanied them in their various settlements in 
Spain, Italy, and England. Finally concentrating our 
attention on the latter country, where their genius re- 
ceives its most forcible development, we have traced the 
connexion between it and Normand)^, and in greater 
detail drawn out their influence on our country and the 
principles of our government. With the reign of Henry I. 
the Norman kings reached their highest pitch of power. 
After him their kingdom passed avv^ay — first to the 
house of Blois, then to that of Anjou. With both these 
houses they had long been connected, with both an 
hereditary and deadly hostility had existed from the 
earliest times. But though the Norman power thus 
slipped away from the direct descendants of Rollo, the 
Norman influence was not destroyed in England. They 
never were driven out. They coalesced with the English, 
and lost their individuality in the common nationality ; 
but they long enjoyed the chief positions in the state, 
and the Norman administrative and executive machinery 
still lies embedded in our constitution side by side with 
the local institutions of the Anglo-Saxons. 

It will be well at the close of our survey to cast our 
eyes abroad, and take a last glance at the condition of 
the other Scandinavian or Norman powers. The con- 



220 The Normans in Europe. a.d. 

tinents of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway had long 
Condition of Settled down into organized communities, and 
the Scandi- for half a centurv had not troubled Europe. 

navian and . . 

Norman Norway Still enjoyed her nommal sway over 

kingdoms. ^]^g Orkneys, the Shetlands, and the dis- 
tricts of Sutherland and Caithness in Scotland, these not 

being ceded to the Lowlands till the middle 

of the fifteenth century. 
In Iceland the free republic was on the point of being 
dismembered by the rise of an aristocracy, and one 
century later was once more to be occupied by Norway, 
To the west of Scotland lay the sovereignty of the Isles, 
consisting of the Hebrides and other islands along the 
coast, as well as certain settlements in Anglesea, Man, 
and Ireland. This kingdom, under the Lords of the 
Isles, owned allegiance to iVorway, but was virtually 

independent. Of these Anglesea and Ireland 

fell to England in the reign of Henry IL, 
Man long enjoyed semi-independence under its own' 
lords, while the Hebrides were ceded to Scotland in 
the latter half of the thirteenth century. 

In Italy the Norman kingdom of Apulia and Sicily 
still belonged to the descendants of Robert Guiscard, 
and maintained constant intercourse with England. 
Under this line of kings it continued until the end of the 
twelfth century, when their dominion passed away, with 
the hand of Constance the Norman heiress, to the 
Emperor Henry VI. 

In Palestine the Norman nobles still held some fiefs ; 
and the Frankish name was to continue there, but with 
fast declining power, until the end of the thirteenth cen- 
tury (1291). In Russia the descendants of Ruric still sat 
on the throne of Kiev, until they should be subdued by 
the Tartar invasion of the same century (1240). 

Thus the end of the Norman period in England 



1 



1 135- Norman Administration. 221 

nearly synchronises with that of their rule elsewhere. 
They had been the leaders during a most influence of 
important epoch of European history. They mans'^in" 
had seen the foundation of most of the future Europe, 
great European powers. For two centuries at least they 
had been the most influential people in Europe. They 
had formed the nucleus of cohesion amidst the fluctuating 
state of European nationalities. Wherever they went 
they had shown themselves great warriors, founders, 
organizers, and administrators. With extraordinary 
powers of adapting themselves to outward and altered 
circumstances, they had, while adopting the systems of 
their conquered subjects, developed them, added to 
them, and perfected them. To them France owes the 
establishment of her national kings, nay almost her 
very existence as the kingdom of France ; southern 
Italy a dynasty under which she enjoyed a prosperity 
denied her since ; Russia a long line of powerful and 
clever princes ; Iceland a free republic ; England a stern 
and harsh schooling indeed, but a useful one — stern law, 
the suppression of anarchy, the establishment of order 
and excellent administration — all essential preliminaries 
of true progress. 

And now their work is over. The Norman period is 
fast waning. New ideas, new forms of government, new 
systems are to arise, and the great impulse which ori- 
ginally had come from the Scandinavian continents is 
exhausted. 



CHAPTER XVII. 

NORMAN ADMINISTRATION. 



The great constitutional work of the Anglo-Norman 
period was, as we have seen, the organization of adminis- 
trative routine. 



222 The Normans in Europe. ch. xvn. 

The Norman king was virtually a despotic sovereign. 

William gained England at a time when the theoretical 

powers of the Anglo-Saxon king were at their 

^"^' highest, and to these he added the preroga- 
tives of the feudal sovereign without the practical limits 
which abroad were found in the independence of the feu- 
dal vassals. The nobles enjoyed none of the semi-royal 
rights of jurisdiction or taxation in their domains, and 
when William 1. exacted the oath of homage from every 
subject at the Council of Sarum, he destroyed even the 
authority which the feudal vassals abroad enjoyed over 
their sub-vassals. 

The Witenagemot, which under the Anglo-Saxons 
had served as a constitutional check on the powers of 
the king, was turned into a feudal court, the creature and 
the servant of the sovereign. The king became the lord 
of the land and the source of all justice, and there was 
no authority in theory or in practice which could gainsay 
his will, One limit alone remained : the crown still in 
theory remained elective, and the right of deposition was 
preserved. Hence the kings, as in the case of Rufus, 
Henry I., and Stephen, were forced to secure their title 
by concessions, which, unfortunately, there was no con- 
stitutional means of enforcing. 

The king thus powerful in theory and in practice, the 
chief interest in N-orman times necessarily centres round 
his person, and all that England then gained must be 
_, _ attributed to the royal authority and to the 

The officers „ . , , , . , • X,, 

of the royal orhciais who surrounded him. 1 he most im- 
household. portant of these originally were the High 
Steward, the Chamberlain, the Constable, officers exclu- 
sively of the royal household, which, though not without 
analogies in Anglo-Saxon times, had been copied by the 
Norman dukes from the old officials of the Karolings. Of 
these officers, the High Steward or Seneschal acted as 



cH. XVII. Norman Administration. 223 

supreme official in the royal court ; the Chamberlain was 
the financial officer of the royal household ; the Constable 
was the Quartermaster General of the royal army ; he 
mustered the forces and ordered their disposition on ser- 
vice, he paid the mercenaries, and had jurisdiction over 
offences against the laws of war and other disputes m 
the army. The Constable subsequently shared his 
powers with the Marshal, an officer of later creation, 
who, besides the share he had in the duties of the 
Constable, took especial cognisance of disputes in the 
court itself. 

The Steward, the Constable, and the Marshal each 
had their separate courts independent of the common 
law, and in later times these were the object of much 
complaint, as interfering with the right of a subject to be 
tried by his peers. 

By the side of these officers of the household there 
rapidly arose a ministerial class who soon supplanted 
them. The household offices became heredi- 
tary in certain familes definitely in the reign teriai 
of Henry II., and fell back into an honourable ^^I'^e'^^- 
position, but one of secondary constitutional importance. 

The ministerial officers are chiefly these : the Justiciary, 
the Treasurer, the Chancellor. Of these the Justiciary 
was, in the Norman times, by far the most 
important. The origin of the office is obscure. J^^^^'^^^'^y- 
It was unknown abroad before the Norman Conquest, and 
was therefore of purely Anglo-Norman creation. The 
first Justiciary was Wilham Fitz-Osbern, the steward or 
seneschal of Wilham, and this has been taken as an indi- 
cation that the origin is to be sought in the Ranulf 
seneschalship, the duties of which were trans- fjid"Rooer 
ferred to this new office. However this may of Salisbury 
be, Ranulf Flambard, the oppressive minister offhe^office. 
of Wilham Rufus, must be considered the first consoli- 



224 T^^^ Nor7nans iit Ettrope. ch, xvii. 

dator of the office, and Roger of Salisbury, the famous, 
minister of Henry I., the final organizer of its duties. 
His powers, growing side by side with the advancing 
centralisation of government, when they reached their 
climax in the reign of Henry I., were these : — He was, 
ex officio, regent of the kingdom in the king's 

His duties , -^ ' ° , .° - , ^ . 

and pre- absencc. He was the president of the Curia 

rogatives. Regis, and of its financial committee or ses- 
sion, the Exchequer, and he united in his own person all 
the rights and duties of supreme financial, judicial, and 
executive officer. 

He was surrounded by a number of officers, who, 
when sitting in the Curia Regis were called Justices, 
but in the Exchequer, Barons of the Exchequer. 

Representing the king, the Justiciary went his circuits, 
by which he kept the local courts in due subordination, 
watched over the financial privileges of the king, and 
held periodical gaol deliveries. 

Already in the time of Henry I., as we have seen, his 
own officers or justices were beginning to take his place 
owing to press of business and increasing centralisation, 
to become under Henry XL the itinerant Justices, with 
regular and fixed circuits. 

The Justiciary from the time of Ranulf Flambard was 
universally an ecclesiastic, probably to prevent the great 
powers of the office from becoming the prerogative of 
any one family, or in any sense hereditary, and because 
churchmen alone could be trusted to administer these 
distinctly antifeudal duties faithfully. 

Next to the Justiciary came the Treasurer. To him 
The Trea- ^^^ entrusted the keeping of the royal treasure 
surer. at Winchester. He was an important officer 

in the Exchequer, and received the accounts of the 
sheriff in that court. 

The Chancellor. This officer, who in after times 



■ <orman Administration. 225 

became the most important of all, and the second sub- 

,cct of the realm next to the Archbishop, r^^^ chan- 

■jtooil only thir l in Norman times. cellor. 

The office appears in England as early as the reign 

' Edward th? Confessor, and was probably derived from 

le archicancellarius of the Karolings. The detivation of 

e name; the ' cancelli,' or screen behind which the 

iocre! -k of the household was carried on, tells us 

of his v.«iit;. 

He was the Secretary of State and chief of the clerks 

r the king's :ourt. Always an ecclesiastic, he held the 

position 01 chief chaplain to the king. He kept the 

king's conscience, as the phrase went, and administered 

the revenues of vacant benefices until they were filled up. 

All these officials were members of the Curia Regis. 
This term seems to be applied indiscriminately to the 
committee of the Commune Concilium, and to the supreme 
judicial court of the realm, and it is by no r^j^^ q,\x-c\^ 
means improbable that they were originally one Regis, 
and the sam.e. ' The committee of the national council 
administering justice in virtue of the king's assumed pre- 
sence there, or the king's judicial court usurping the 
legislative functions of the national council.' 

It is, however, with the Curia Regis as a judicial 
court that we are now concerned. Again many opinions 
have been held as to the origin of this court. 
Some claim for it a purely Saxon origin, and as a judicial 
look upon it as representing the committee of ^°"'''^- 
the old Witenagemot. By others it is declared to be of 
purely Norman growth. The truth seems to lie between. 
No doubt the Dukes of Normandy had their Curia 
Ducis, or feudal court, in common with other feudatories. 
This they brought with them to England, and uniting it 
with the committee of the Witenagemot turned it into 
the Curia Regis. For the rest, its powers were of gradual 

M. H. Q 



226 The Normans in Europe. ch. xvir. 

growth, and, as they appear under Henry I., were different 
at once from its Anglo-Saxon and Norman prototypes 
a court of Anglo-Norman creation and organization with ' 
a double origin. 

The Curia Regis then, as a judicial court, was the 
court of the king sitting to administer justice with his 
counsellors. These were theoretically all the members 
of the national council — practically, the great officers of 
state, and a few expressly summoned justices ; and in 
the absence of the king, it was presided over by the jus- 
ticiary. Its original jurisdiction extended to disputes 
between the tenants in chief, and in other cases where 
leave had been obtained. But its more important duties 
belonged to it as a court of appeal from the inferior 
courts. In this way the local courts were united to the 
central courts, and this connexion was much increased 
when the justices of the supreme court became itinerant 
justices, or were made sheriffs, as was the policy of 
Henry I. 

When sitting for financial purposes it was called the 
Exchequer, and since in Norman times the financial neces- 
The Ex- sities of the king were the primary motives in 
chequer. developing the judicial system, this its finan- 

cial side was the most important. At the two full 
sessions held at Easter and Michaelmas, the sheriffs 
appeared and paid the farm of the shire, each county^s 
share of the Danegeld, the proceeds of the pleas of the 
crown, and the feudal dues ; these, with the sale of 
offices and exactions under the Forest laws, forming the 
chief incidents of Norman taxation. The Farm of the 
Shire was the sum for which the shire was let to the 
sheriff, who reimbursed himself from the royal dues, the 
tines in the court, the profits from the royal demesnes, 
or from other sources. The Danegeld was a tax levied 
since Anglo-Saxon times for the defence of the realm, 



Nonnaji Adininistratioii. 227 

but much increased by William I. and Henry I. The 
Pleas of the Crown were special offences, the fines of 
which went directly to the crown ; especially the 7nurdrum, 
or sum of money payable by each hundred in cases 
where a murder had been committed within their limits. 
By William I. this was exacted in cases where the mur- 
dered man could not be proved to be an Englishman, 
and the verdict which settled this was called the Present- 
ment of Englishry. 

Of these accounts the Treasurer and the Chancellor 
each kept an account, termed the Pipe Roll of the 
Treasurer, and the Roll of the Chancellor. 

Cases of dispute were settled by the Barons of the 
Exchequer, who went their circuits for this purpose, and 
these were probably the origin of the later judicial circuits 
of the Justices in Eyre. 

Under the central court, with its two sides, judicial 
and financial, worked the local courts of the shire, the 
hundred, and the manor. These were con- Local 
tinued from Anglo-Saxon times, and the pro- courts. 
cedure remained the same, with, the addition of the trial 
by combat in cases where Normans were concerned, and 
the inquests by sworn jurors for the purpose of gaining 
information, such as that required for the compilation 
of the Domesday Survey, for the assessment of taxa- 
tion, and for the settlement of disputes concerning 
land. 

In the Shire court, presided over by the sheriff, the 
king's nominee, greater causes, civil and crimina'l, were 
tried. 

The Hundred court, presided over by the bailiff, settled 
small disputes of debt ; and when presided over by the 
sheriff, was termed the Sheriff^s leet in criminal matters, 
the Sheriff^s tourn, for holding views of frank-pledge in 
connexion with the system of police. 

Q2 



228 The Normans in Europe, ch. xvii. 

The bond between these courts and the central court 
was very sMght at first, and it was the work of the Nor- 
Connexion Hian period to draw it tighter. WilHam I. 
cenmd'and ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ purpose resorted to the custom 
local courts, of holding three annual sessions of the Curia 
Regis in the three great towns of the south, Westminster, 
Winchester, and Gloucester. Henry I. sent his Barons 
of the Exchequer to sit in the county court for the assess- 
ment of revenue. The Justices in his reign also began to 
go their circuits, and were often themselves made sheriffs, 
by which the subordination of these local courts was 
effectually secured. 

Besides these popular courts, there existed also the 
Manorial courts, the Forest courts, and the Courts of the 
enfranchised boroughs. 

The manor was nothing more than the ancient town- 
ship which had now fallen to a feudal lord. They had, 
as before shown (p. 147), virtually existed in Anglo-Saxon 
times, in the case of those thanes who had gained 
^, independent rights of jurisdiction conveyed 

The manor. ^ \ . ■' . t >.t 

by the grants of sac and soc. In Norman 
times they were so much increased that nearly the whole 
of England was divided into manors, either of the king or 
belonging to some lord, with the exception of a few 
enfranchised boroughs. 

These manors would be thus divided : part the lord 
Divisions of would keep for his own use under the name 
the manor. of the demesne ; the rest would be granted 
out to freehold tenants on varying terms of tenure, or 
would form the waste over which the lord retained the. 
right of sporting, while the tenants of the manor might 
there feed their cattle or cut their turf and peat. Of 
the demesne again part was retained in the actual occu- 
pation of the lord : his park and farm, which was termed 
the demesne proper. On the rest his villeins would bet 



Norman Administration. 229 

settled. Bound to the soil, they might not' leave it, and 
in return for their small holdings they had to till the de- 
mesne proper. If the land were sold they passed with it. 

In these manors the old town-reeve had given up his 
place to the steward of the lord, but in other respects the 
procedure was the same as in the popular courts. The rights 
of jurisdiction varied according to the terms of grant. All 
had their Court baron, representing the Gemot Manorial 
of the Anglo-Saxon township, in which by- courts. 
laws were passed and local business transacted ; and all 
their Customary court for the business of the villeinage. 
In these cases the lords were not exempt from the juris- 
diction of the Hundred court. Others would have by 
grant Courts leet for criminal purposes, and others a 
right to hold views of frank-pledge, as they were called, 
when the manor would be free from the Courts leet and 
tourn of the sheriff respectively. 

In some great baronial jurisdictions, which included 
almost the whole shire, the lords enjoyed entire indepen- 
dence of the sheriff and the Shire court, and the suitors 
to their courts exemption from all attendance at the 
popular courts. The number of these greater jurisdic- 
tions, which were hereditary, always had a tendency to 
increase, and were dangerous not only as decreasing the 
profits of the popular courts and the crown, but as serving 
as a basis for baronial tyranny in such times as those of 
Stephen. There was no means of checking them except 
by increasing the central power, and it was not till the 
reign of Henry II. that they were compelled to admit the 
Justices of Eyre to exercise jurisdiction in them. 

There was no privilege to which the Norman kings 
clung so closely, or which caused so much misery and 
discontent, as their exclusive right of enjoying Forest 
the sport in the royal forests. William had courts, 
desolated the New Forest with cold-blooded indifference, 



230 The Normans in Eui^ope. ch. xvn. 

and the curse had been visited on his family. Rufus had 
much increased the forests. Even Henry refused to part 
with any when he had to appeal to the people in his 
charter, and added more to their number. At a somewhat 
later date it was computed that there were 67 forests, be- 
sides 30 chases and 781 parks. Over these the jurisdiction 
was vested in the Forest courts. Here a distinct system of 
law prevailed. They were ruled by royal officials, indepen- 
dent of the ordinary judges of the popular courts and Curia 
Regis, not bound by the common law, and irresponsible 
except to the king. Their laws and customs were their 
own, and variable, until Henry II. issued the first Forest 
code, even then marked by such severity that it is said 
the punishment for breach of forest law was heavier than 
for heresy. Nothing proves more strongly the arbitrary 
rule of the Norman kings, or their selfishness, than the 
stubbornness with which they clung to their forests and 
Forest courts. 

In Anglo-Saxon times some of the more fortunate 
boroughs had gained an exemption from the Hundred 
Courts court, and enjoyed their own rights of jurisdic- 

of the tion in their ward and borough motes, with an 

borough. . . . ., , - , , 

organization similar to that of the popular 
courts. They still, however, remained subject to the 
Shire court, and the sheriff collected from them the royal 
dues. By the Norman Conquest they fell into the de-^ 
mesne of some great lord or of the king, and the status of 
citizens exactly corresponded with that of the inhabitants 
of the rural districts, those who held property being 
termed ' burgage ' tenants, corresponding to the ' socage ' 
tenants, and the lower class of citizens to the ' villeins ' 
of the rural manor. For any further advance they now 
had to look to the grant of the lord or king in whose 
demesne they lay. Those who were not rich enough to 
buy these privileges, or were on the demesnes of some lord 



Norman Administration. 231 

who had not the power of granting these immunities, 
remained much in the condition in which the Norman 
Conquest found them, and survive to the present day in 
our market towns, with an humble machinery of poHce 
and magistracy in connexion with their markets. The 
more privileged gained their charters from king or lord. 
Having won independent jurisdiction, the next step was 
to procure an independent administration. This, as was 
so often the case in Norman times, first took the form of 
a fiscal question. Hitherto the sheriff had himself com- 
pounded for the dues of the boroughs in the farm of his 
county, and levied the dues upon the town himself, and 
to his own profit. Probably in many cases more was 
exacted than was legal ; but the towns had no remedy. 
It was natural, therefore, that they should wish to com- 
pound directly with the king or lord, and thus be freed 
from the common valuation of the shire. This was done 
by obta,ining charters, by which the burghers themselves 
rented the borough dues, paying to the king or lord the 
rent of the borough (firma burgi), and collecting it them- 
selves from the citizens. Thus they were freed from the 
exactions of the sheriff, and changed their varying dues 
into a fixed and certain rent. The grant of the ferm 
implied an emancipation from ' villein ' services ; and, 
since the ferm was generally granted to the ward-mote of 
the town, all members of that court, holders of land or 
houses within the borough, henceforth held their land on 
free ' burgage ' tenure. This, with a few other privileges^ 
was all that was gained in Norman times. 

Side by side with the growth of the boroughs, the 
system of guilds had arisen. For the origin of these we 

must look to Anglo-Saxon times. The dis- ^ ., , 

. _ . . ^ . 1 ^ . • Guilds, 

tmguishmg feature of early Teutonic society 

lay in its strong spirit of local organization, in itself pro-r 

bably a remains of the old family tie. As this family tie 



232 The Normans in Europe, ch. xvn. 

became weakened, they seem to have sought for some 
-other personal bond, founded on the analogy of the family, 
which might take its place. Hence the rise of guilds which 
appear universally in Western Europe, taking various 
•forms, of which the following are the most important. 

Religioits or social guilds. — These were probably the 
earliest, and resorted to for some religious purpose, such 
Religious ^^ prayers for quick and dead, burial of their 
or social dead, representation of miracle plays, alms, 
Frith ' and good works. Others again formed friendly 

^'^^^^- societies for mutual help and protection. ' If 

one misdo,' runs one of their by-laws, ' let all bear it : 
let all share the same lot.' Others, under the name of 
Frith guilds, formed assurance companies against loss or 
theft, to give compensation when any member had suf- 
fered, and to avenge all insults as common ones. It is to 
these Frith guilds that we probably owe the idea which 
afterwards led to the system of frank-pledge. At times all 
these objects would be united in one guild. The existence 
of such associations as these, and their rules of member- 
ship, speak highly for the peace and order loving character 
of the people ; and as they survived the Norman Conquest, 
they affected our after history. No rebel or man of bad 
fame might be enrolled a member, and such offences 
worked instant forfeiture ; while a rule from a guild of 
later date speaks highly for their moral and industrial 
influence : ^ If any man fall poor from using to lie long in 
bed, and at rising off his bed will not work but go to the 
tavern, wine, ale, wrestling, and in this manner falleth poor, 
that man shall never have help or good of the companie 
neither in life or death, but shall be put out of the companie.' 

As trade increased, the same spirit of association led 
Merchant to the risc of merchant and craft guilds. 
guilds. Q£ these the merchant guilds probably existed 

in some few cases before the Conquest, but rapidly in- 



Norman Administration. 233 

creased during the Norman period. They were associa- 
tions of merchants uniting for purposes of mutual 
assistance in trade. They gained by charters the 
monopoly of trade, and then gradually obtained the vir- 
tual government of the towns by the following means. 
The guild, including as it did all the important men of 
the town, would necessarily be members of the borough 
courts ; thus the members of the guild and the governing 
body of the town would be composed of the same persons, 
and guild law would tend to become town Merchant 
law. But further, in some cases the mer- guilds pur- 
chant guilds seem themselves to have pur- 'firma 
chased the ' firma burgi,' and in virtue of this '^"'^gi- 
would have the right of assessing the contributions upon 
the citizens. Thus membership in a merchant guild would 
be indispensable for the full status of a burgher, who 
thereby gained a stronger spirit of co-operative union. 
Still the governing body of the town and the guild were 
not as yet identical. Their organization was separate, 
and the influence of the guild was indirect rather than 
actual or avowed. 

Beneath these merchant guilds, the lower craft guilds, 
or associations of craftsmen, had begun to arise ; but for 
their future development, and the consequent Craft 
struggle between them and the merchant g^'ids. 
guilds for the municipal government, we have to wait 
for a later date. 

The towns then in Norman times had gained an inde- 
pendent jurisdiction, some independence of administration 
in fiscal matters, and various privileges. But Condition of 
they were still subject to the Shire court ; they Gorman 
were in no sense a corporate unity, as they times, 
subsequently became, and their organization was still that 
of the rural hundreds and townships. 

The condition of London was, indeed, somewhat more 



234 The Normans in Europe. ch. xvn. 

advanced. By the charter of Henry I. it received the 
' ferm ' of the whole county of Middlesex, with 

London. .". .. ,,.„ 

the right of appointing the sheriff. The citi- 
zens were freed from all jurisdiction of any other Shire 
court, and from the obligation of trial by combat, together 
with other privileges and immunities. They had their 
folk-moot, answering to the Shire court elsewhere : their 
ward-mote, corresponding to the rural Hundred courts ; 
and their ' hustings court,' or weekly meeting of the citi- 
zens in common. Still even London, though far in 
advance of any other towns, had no municipality as yet. 
It was, in fact, a civic shire, as the other towns were civic 
hundreds ; and under their folk-moot, or Shire court, the 
several townships, parishes, and manors of which it was 
composed, retained their separate jurisdiction and organi- 
zation. 

The military system of the Norman kings was three- 
fold. 

(i) The Anglo-Saxon organization of the militia was 
Military retained. By this, every man was bound to 

system. scrvc the king on foot in times of danger. 

They were marshalled under the sheriff of 
each shire, and each man received the sum of los. from 
his county to meet the expenses of his service. 

(2) To this the Normans added the feudal levy, by 
which every tenant by knight service had to Feudal 
furnish one fully armed horseman for forty ^^^y- 
clays in the year, when summoned by the king, either on 
home or foreign service. 

The baron led his own knights, and the host was mar- 
shalled by the Constable and Marshal ; those knights who 
held immediately of the crown appearing with the militia 
under tlie sheriff. 

(3) These levies were further supplemented in time 
of war by foreign mercenaries of footmen and archers. 



Norinan AdminisU'ation. 235 

Thus William I. hired mercenaries to resist the invasion 
of Canute of Denmark in 1085 ; and Stephen's Mercena- 
employment of Flemish and Breton merce- "^^• 
naries, at the outbreak of the civil war, alienated many 
of his partisans. 

We have spoken of the probable relation which the 
Curia Regis held to the Commune Concilium, or national 
council. 

This national council is to be considered r^^^ 
as a continuation of the Anglo-Saxon Witena- National 
gemot, under the character of a feudal court. 

Theoretically, all freeholders holding in chief of the 
crown were members, and on a few great occasions, as at 
the Council of Salisbury, 1085, such general musters would 
be made. But in those days, attendance at the royal 
councils was looked upon as a burden rather than a 
privilege; and its ordinary members would accordingly 
be confined to the archbishops, the bishops, abbots, earls, 
barons, and knights ; and of these probably only Me-^be 
a limited number of the more important would of the 

T ., National 

ordmarily appear. Council. 

The abbots and friars sat in virtue of their A^?^" 

bishops. 

holding a barony of the king, the archbishops Bishops. 
and bishops as being besides the chief ad- 
visers of the crown. 

The earls, originally the successors of the Anglo-Saxon 
earls, whose numbers, at first small, were increased in 
the reigns of Henry I. and Stephen, gained 
their dignity by special investiture of the 
sword of their county by the king. The proceeds of 
jurisdiction they shared with the sheriff, receiving a third 
of the fines arising in the Shire court. 

The barons were the successors of the king's thanes 
of Anglo-Saxon times. They held in chief of the king, 
and enjoyed a dignity sometimes personal, sometimes 



236 The Normans in Europe. ch. xvii. 

territorial. The class was composed of many grades, 
varying according to their personal qualifi- 
cations, official duties, and extent of property. 

The knights, representing the old thanes, were really 
Knights. the lesser barons, in fact the whole class of 
tenants by knight service. 

The powers of the council thus formed, theoretically 
extended to legislation and taxation. The king acknow- 
Powers of ledgcd 'its counsel and consent' in the former, 
the Council and in the latter probablv laid before it any 
rather than plan for increasing the existing taxes. But, 
practical. practically, the king was absolute, and its 
counsel and consent a mere form. 

The council, however, still enjoyed certain powers. 
These courts were held annually on the festivals of 
Easter, Pentecost, and Christmas, at the towns of Win- 
chester, Gloucester, and Westminster, respectively, when 
the king wore his crown before his subjects. 

It formed a court of judicature for trying peers, as in 
the case of Waltheof, in the reign of William I., and of 
Robert of Belesme in that of Henry I. 

Here also the following business was transacted. The 
bishops were nominated, until Henry I. granted the right 
of free election to the chapters ; here the earldoms and 
other dignities would be conferred ; questions of policy 
discussed and ecclesiastical canons ratified, though the 
archbishop often held an ecclesiastical council at the 
same time, where the canons themselves would be pre- 
pared. 

Even in these matters the council probably did little 
more than give its formal assent, and the only point m 
which its authority was practically exercised was in the 
election of the king. On those occasions the royal 
authority was in abeyance ; the nation resumed its rights, 



Norman Administration. 237 

only to lose them again as soon as they had elected their 
future master. 

Thus the Norman king enjoyed an authority, confined 
indeed within certain theoretical limits, but Practical 
practically irresponsible, and the government irresponsi- 

^ . , 1 • 1 1 ., 1 -, • bility of the 

might not bemaptly described as a despotism Norman 
tempered by the elective principle. ^^"^" 

Of the administration of Normandy during this, as in 
the earlier period, we have but scanty evidence. All 
the authorities, of which the Grand Coutumier Administra- 
of Normandy is the most important, are of tion of 
later compilation ; and of original charters, 
rolls, or other documents, there is a curious dearth. 

We may be sure, however, that there was a close 
connexion between England and Normandy at this date ; 
though, probably owing to the disturbed condition of the 
duchy, England was considerably in advance. 

We have noticed before the analogies between the 
Curia Regis and Exchequer of England and the Curia 
Ducis and Exchequer of Normandy. 

No doubt England here borrowed largely, especially 
in the forms of procedure, from her foreign sister. But 
so had she done from Anglo-Saxon institutions, and the 
debt of Normandy to England was probably as great. 

Of the municipal life in Normandy again we know but 
little. We hear of sworn communes, and Le Mans had 
wrested privileges from William as early as Municipal 
1073 (p. 175). But in common with the rest ^^^^• 
of France, the object of municipal freedom in Normandy 
was more distinctly political than in England, and a com- 
parison of the few charters which remain leads us to the 
conclusion that in this as in other matters the advantage 
lay with England. 

In conclusion, the question how far England and 



238 The Normans in Europe. ch. xvii. 

Normandy borrowed each from the other will best be 
Mutual in- answered if we remember that it was a period 
fluence of q£ transition and of growth in both coun- 

the two ° 

countries. tries, and that the administrative systems of 
each country grew together. 



GENEALOGICAL TABLES 



240 



The Normans in Europe. 






y r-* G 











.2^ i- 
— u C 


^ 












^- 


vS 












O 












^ 














■^ 


































< 








o\ 






)-] 














o 








S-4 






z 


, 










W 


t-5 


V5 


6 


Cl ni 




y-<. 






I. 

R Karoling 


1 (893-9 
ewis IV. d'Outn 


00 
?^ 
o\ 
1) 

— .'3 — 
o 


00 

ON 

00 

ON 

>■ 
- Ifl 
% 


II. 

D Kings of 


1= 


w 


II 


• pJ 


hj 


1-1 


2; 


< 


1) 


II 
>. 

c 
o 






< 


<!>4 




X 


y. 






vyj 


T»» 


M 




rt 










ffi 


< 


in 






B 


H 


O 


o 






Q 






« 


1— J 

>> 
ii 

c 
1) 

o 






2 

<; 

erf 

O 



o 



o 



p^ 






fi;^ 



^ 



a'o 



PQ 



3 <^ 



tH — < 



o 



W o 



P^ 



II 

-a 



Gcnealos^ical Tables. 



241 



.5 "a §-2 

Swum 

i-1h 

ti c: ^ 



11:=: 

Pi -• 



<.- ° 



> 



& ^ 



-04; c 



~"C = 



ri „ 



U 3 



,|w^u 



O; 



2 C\ 



Pi 
II- 



-life 



•^ .-3 



14 00 
o o 

U 11 

u I 



m c 



I o « 



rtW 






P< 






i. MX:.,-" i> 



l2 



V C in 




'S ^'o 


C 


P<o — 


V '~r 






■|| 


— 4-11-1 


«i 


"oJ 


boo 



«■ 






U 












3° 



WO ^ 
2 ffi 



2i>-' 



•■33-5 



'L> 




-2.^ «^ 
,™ »- i> 

«^ o • 

■^^ 

. a o pm 
o ^ Ot_ 

. O rt o 

.-§0:5 

J-. x! re oj 
S '2 — s- 

o;^ 3~ 

^ C J, <u 

71 aj 3) !« 
S '■" ^ 

,^ S rt "" 



cr 



.1/. H. 



R 



>42 



The Normans in Europe. 



u* 



u 




'/; 




<!i 




p> 




h^ 




fo 




o 


o 




vo 


yi 


CO 


O 


^ 


2: 


o 






M 


bl3 












o 


G 


t^ 


x; 


w 



c 



-el 

-a o 






II II 

c - 

iS 



-S-S 5 



UfSH 






\^ 



-Moo 



t3 



_a 
a 

w 



bo . 

03 c 



M 3 

— m 






K 



I 

4-1 00 



< 



Ui 



42 rt 
bD,t« 



fc^ 



aj 






mo 



c i_; 



^ 



O t« 

pj; o 



^ 






£2 



I 

1 



CO t— (• 



2 c 



-m 



pii^ 






CJ 



Genealogical Tables. 



243 



o» 



O 

Q 

< 
> 



O 



o 



i5 ^ 



P3 






^ s 



u 



1^ 

u 



V 



1^ <^ 

II ^ 



4) 

II 



§ ^ 



II US 



<~^ 



tq 



Q 

u 

So 

.-C "5 



_^ ^ 



^ o 

-00 



rn 



4J M 



:0 






O 1_, 



W 



Sf^^ 



5 o 4J a, 
II 



C O 

13 c« 



o fco 



I. a 



ai 



rt-g 



H 
H 

O 

(0 

w 



■H O 

.2 "^ 

'33 5 

33.2 



244 



The Normans in Europe. 



o 



m 



bo si; 

H 
II 



2o — 






3^' 

lis 

<3 



^ 



o . 
!- ry. 


1— 1 




> 


fe 
V 1 


— u 


0^ 


-a 




o 


O 


"rt 



< 

1-5 



« 



> i. 



5^ 
O 

u 



Pd 



ffi 



w 



m- 



Ch 



^ 13 — • 
t— I 






Coo — ^ ON ■:3 o) 
^5° -§5°. E 



is % 



p^, 






'-^. 



o t^T5 

o 1^ 

c^ o o- 

<<-i O "O 

_ 3^^ 



I J 



• rt 



.S o 






ffi 



Genealogical Tables. 



245 



w *-;. o 



O 



O rt 



C4 
^6 



— P4 



„ o 
< 



it: V 
00 



M 

u 


--C' 


— ^_; 


U) 




1— ( 


"oJ 


-^ 


j^ 




fe 


3 



>> L 
« 6 

O M 

o 



o 



c a.t! 

rt O I; 

— II 






r bo o> 
fa 



-H- ^, 



5£ ^ 



K 



"-I h 

w ft . 

K S> 
ot*H ij 

O C! 
rt 



>-7r 



o 2 
a) H 



•Sort 

CO iS 



"W 



JUL) 



INDEX. 



ABB 

ABBOTS, members of Commune 
Conciliuni, 236 
Adelais of Louvain, second wife of 

Henry I., 213 
Adeliza, daughter of Richard the 

'Good, wife of Stephen of Blois^ 73 
Alan of Brittany, see Brittany 
Alen^on revolts against Duke Wil- 
liam, 91 
Alfred, his wars against the Danes, 

20 
Alice, sister of Richard III., wife of 

Renaud of Burgundy, 88 
Allodial property, 141 
Alnwick, Malcolm of Scotland slain 

at, 191 
Amalfi, Republic of, 77 ; capital of 

Norman kingdom of Apulia, ib. ; 

trade of, 80 
Ambrieres, occupied by Duke Wil- 
liam, 122 
Anacletus, Pope, confers title of king 

on Roger II. of Sicily, 81 
Anglesea conquered by Henry II., 

220 
Anglo-Saxon institutions, sketch of, 

141, 151 ; weakness and strength 

of, 152 ; character, 157 
Anjou, sketch of history of, 121 

— Ingelger, First Count, id. 

— Fulk Nerra humbles Brittany 
and Blois, seizes Saumur, con- 
quers Touraine, zd. ; supports 
Robert against Henrj'^ I., 84, 122 

— Geoffrey Martel seizes Tours, 
122 ; seizes Alengon against Duke 
William, 91 ; dispute about Maine, 
122 ; joins Henry I. against Duke 
William, z'l>. ; defeated at Vara- 
ville, 123 ; his dominions divided 



ATH 

between Geoffrey and Fulk Re- 
chin, 124 
Anjou, Fulk Rechin occupies Maine 
against William I., agrees to 
treaty of Blanchelande, 174 

— Fulk V. occupies Maine against 
Henry I., 210 ; his daughter mar- 
ries Prince William, 211 ; supports 
William Clito, 212 ; marries heir- 
ess of Jenxsalem, and accepts 
crown of, z'd. 

— Geoffrey IV. of, son of Fulk, mar- 
ries Matilda, daughter of Henry 
I-, 213 

Anselm at Bee, 185 ; made archbishop, 
his character contrasted with that 
of Lanfranc, tb. ; quarrel with Ru •■ 
fus, 187 ; appeals to Rome and 
leaves England, 189 ; recalled by 
Henry I., 220 ; supports Henry, 
203 : quarrel with Henry concern- 
ing investitures,2o6; reconciliation, 
207; enforces celibacy of clerg3%209 

Antioch, principality of, under Bohe- 
mond, 197 

Apulia under the Normans, 77, 220 

Aquitaine, 38 ; Duke of, joins rebels 
against Duke William, 120 

Archbishops, members of Commune 
Concilium, 235, 236 

Aries, kingdom of, 37 

Arnulf, Emperor, 36 

— of Flanders marries daughter of 
Herbert II. of Vermandols, 47 ; 
plots the murder of William Long- 
sword, 48 

Arundel, castle of, reduced by Henry 

I., 204 
Athelstan protects his son-in-law 

Louis d'Outre-mer, 43 



248 



Index. 



AVE 

Aversa, settlement of Normans at, 76 
Azzo, Marquis of Este. occupies 
Maine, 174 



BALDWIN, Counts of Flanders, 
see Flanders 

— brother of Godfrey of Bouillon at 
Edessa, 197 

— of Hainault, a leader in first cru- 
sade, 194 

Barons, members of Commune Con- 
cilium, 236 

Bee, founded by Herluin, 106 : Lan- 
franc, prior of, 107 ; Anselm, abbot 
of, 186 

Belesme, Ivo de, 51 

— William Talvas de, cursesWilliam 
when a babe, 83 ; rebels against 
Robert the Magnificent, ib. ; re- 
bels against Duke William, 88 ; 
stirs up men of Alengon, 99 

— Robert of. Earl of Shrews- 
bury and Count of Alengon, joins 
Robert against William I., 176 ; 
against William Rufus, 182 ; 
against Henry I., 203 ; driven 
from England, 204 ; cruelty in 
Normandy, 205 ; taken prisoner, 
ib ; succeeded by William Talvas, 
206 

— William Talvas, Count of Alen- 
900, 206 

Benedictines in Normandy, 105 

Beneficiary system, 92 

Berengarius, controversy with Lan- 
franc on Eucharist, 108 

Berenger of Brittany, see Brittany 

Bernard the Dane, 51 

Bessin granted by Charles the Sim- 
ple to RoUo, 40 ; rebels against 
William Longsword, 44 ; rebels 
against Duke William, 89 

Bigod, Roger, supports Robert 
against William II., 182 ; sup- 
ports Henry I., 203 

Bishops officers of the Shire Court, 
142 ; removed by William to the 
Ecclesiastical Court, 171 ; their 
power increased, ib. ; members of 
Commune Concilium, 235 

— Anglo-Saxon bishops depi-ived of 
their Sees by William I., 170 

— Norman, superiority of, ib. 
Blanchelande, Treaty of, 174 
Blois, Eudes II. of, see Eudes, 

— Stephen, see Stephen. 



BUR 

Blois, Theobald I. of, marries Leut- 
garda, widow of William Long- 
sword, 51 

— Theobald III. of, rebels against 
Duke William, 120 ; defeated by 
Fulk Nerra, 122 ; defeats Louis 
VI., 211 

Boc-land, the, 141 

Bohemond, Prince of Tarento, a 
leader in the First Crusade, a type 
of Crusaders, 196 ; at Antioch, 197 

Boroughs, Anglo-Saxon, 147; growth 
of, in Norman times, 230 ; courts, 
ib. 

Boso of Provence, 37 

Bouillon, see Godfrey 

Boulogne, Eustace, Count of, bro- 
ther-in-law of Edward the Con- 
fessor, quarrels with Godwine, 113; 
rebels against William I., 137 

— son of former, supports Robert 
against William II., 182 ; father- 
in-law of King Stephen, 195 

Brenneville, battle of, 211 

Breteuil, Roger, Earl of Hereford, 

son of Fitz-O.sbern, rebels against 

William, 175 

— William of, brother of Roger, 
joins Robert against William I., 
176; against Henry I., 201 

Bridgnorth, Castle of, reduced by 

Henry I., 204 
Brittany, practical independence of, 

under Charles the Simple, 38-44 ; 

overlordship of, granted to RoUo, 

35 

— Alan and Berenger of, revolt 
against William Longsword, 44 

— Geoffrey, Count of Rennes, gains 
supremacy over Brittany, 66 ; his 
marriage alliances with Richard 
the Good, 73 

— Alan and Odo, sons of Geoffrey, 
wards of Richard the Good, ib, 

— Alan rebels against Robert the 
Magnificent, 83 ; guardian of 
Duke William, 87 

— Conan II., son of Alan of, rebels 
against William, reduced, 127 ; 
defeated by Fulk NeiTa, 122 

— Alan II. of, at Hastings, 132 

— Conan III. of, marries illegitimate 
daughter of Henry I., 211 

— Henry I.'s overlordship definitely 
recognised, 211, 212 

— lost to England under John, /Z-. 
Burgage Tenants, 230 



Index. 



249 



BUR 

Burgundy, Cisjurane and Trans- 
jurane, 37 

— County of, under Otho William, 
37, 72 ; Renaud of, marries Alice, 
daughter of Richard the Good , 73 ; 
Guy,Count of, rebels againstDuke 
William, 88 

— Duchy of, under Richard the 
Justiciar, 37 ; rebels against 
Charles the Simple, 38 ; Rudolf of. 
King of West Franks, brother-in- 
law of Hugh the Great, 40, 43 ; 
sovereignty over, granted toHugh 
the Great, 52 ; under Henry 
Eudes, brother of Hugh Capet, 72; 
Otho William claims it, ib. ; Ro- 
bert,brother of Henrj' I. of France, 
Duke of, 84 

CAEN sacked by Henry I. of 
France, 123 ; Treaty of, be- 
tween William II. and Robert, 183 

Caipha, Tancred at, 197 

Cannae, defeatof Greeks by Normans 
at, 77 

Canterbury, supremacy over York 
asserted, 170 ; over Wales, 206 ; 
See of, kept vacant by William 
Rufus, 184 

Canute conquers England, and mar- 
ries Emma, widow of Ethelred, 
75, no ; his dealings with Robert 
the Magnificent, 85 ; his northern 
empire, ioq ; his policy, ib. ; his 
earldoms, 112 

— of Denmark marries daughter of 
Robert de Frison, Count of Flan- 
ders, 177 ; threatens an invasion 
of England, his death, ib. 

Cardiff, Robert of Normandy impri- 
soned at, 205 

Carlisle, quarrel between William 
Rufus and Malcolm about, 191 ; 
See of, founded by Henry I., 209 

Castle, a feudal, described, 100 

Ceorls, the, 140 ; how affected by 
rise of thaneship, 145 

Chamberlain, the, 222 

Chancellor, the, 225 

Channel Islands granted to William 
Longsword, 45 ; their later inde- 
pendence, 

Charles the Bald grants Paris to 
Robert the Strong, 33 

— the Great, fall of his empire, 
30; character of his empire, 61 



COU 

Charles III., dismemeberment of 
his empire, 36 

— of Lorraine competitor for crown 
of West Franks, 60 

— the Simple, King of West Franks,. 
38 ; grants Normandy to Rollo, 
35 ; imprisoned by Herbert of 
Vermandois, 40 ; dies, ib. 

Chester a County Palatine, 160 : 

under Hugh Lupus, 
Chivalry, 97 
Church, importance of the, in early 

times, 165 

— Anglo-Saxon, condition of, at 
time of Norman Conquest, 166 r. 
relation of to State, 170 ; policy 
of William I. towards, 166-173 

— English, Henry I.'s concilia- 
tion of, 202 ; supports Henry L,. 
203 

Cinque Ports, 135, 183 

Cistercians, monasteries in England, 

209 
Citeaux, monastery of, 210 
Civitella, battle of, 78 
Clair-on-Epte, treaty of, 35 
Clergy, married, policy of Lanfranc 

to, 170; of Anselm, 209 
Clontarf, battle of, 24 
Clugny, Hildebrand at, 167 
Combat, trial by, 95, 227 
Comitatus, the, 93 
Commendation, 93 
Commune Concilium, the, 235 
Compurgation, 143 
Conan of Brittany, see Brittany 
Conrad of Franconia, 36, 39 
Constable, the, 223 
Constance, widow of Robert of 

France, opposes her son, Henry I.^ 

84 . 
Constantinople, relations of, with, 
Russia, 28 

— Harald Hardrada at, 29 
C6tentin, the, granted by William 

Longsword, 44 ; Danish setclers in, 
47 ; rebels against Duke William, 
89; bought by Henrj' I. of Ro- 
bert, 200 
Courts, Baron, 229 

— Borough, 230 

— Ecclesiastical, established by 
William I., 171 ; their encroach- 
ments, 173 

— Feudal, 95 

— Forest, 229 



250 



Index. 



cou 

Courts, Hundred, Anglo-Saxon, 
14I ; maintained by William I., 
153 ; revived by Henry I., 214 

— Norman, 227 ; leet, 229 

— Manor, 153, 229 

- — Shire, Anglo-Saxon, 141, 153, 214 

Norman, 228 

■ — Township, 141, 153 
Crusades, causes of, 192 

— First Crusade, character and 
leaders of, 194 ; results of, 197 

•Cumberland claimed by Scotlandj 

191 ; definitely united to England, 

198 
Curfew bell, ordinance of, 124 
'Curia Regis, the, under William, 

153 ; organised by Henry I., 215, 

225-227 
■Customs of William I., 172 
Cyril translates Bible into Slavonic, 

28 



DANEGELD, the, 227 
Danes, their conquest of Eng- 
land, 19 ; accept Christianity, 20 ; 
invade England under Swegen, 
74 ; aid rebels against William I.; 
they are bought off, 137, 138 ; lose 
command of the sea, 178 

Davids, St., Bishop of, claims metro- 
politan authority, 206 

Demesne, the, 228 

Denmark, condition of, in eighth 
century, 2-7 ; in twelfth century, 
220 ; reforms of Canute in, 178 ; see 
Corm, Harald, Blaatand, Swegen, 
Canute, Harthacnut 

Dermot of Leinster protects Harold, 

."4 

Dives, the, river, battle on, 53 

] Domesday Survey, 155, 178 

Domfront occupied by Duke Wil- 
liam, 122 
- Henry I. at, 200 

])onald Bean, brother of Malcolm, 
claimant for Scottish throne, 191 

Dorchester, See of, removed to Lin- 
coln, 171 

Dreux ceded to Eudes of Blois by 
Richard the Good, 73 

Drogo, 77, 78 

Dublin, Norwegian settlements in, 
23 

Durham, a County Palatme, 159 



EMM 

EADMER, biographer of Anselm, 
185, 189 

Ealdorman, the, 140-142 ; succeeded 
by the Earl, 153 

Earls, the Norman, 154, 159, 235 

East Anglia under Harold, 112 ; 
under Gurth, 126 

Edessa, Baldwin at, 197 

Edgar the .^theling heir to the Eng- 
lish throne, 126 ; chosen king, 135; 
rebels against William 1., 137 ; as- 
sists Edgar to win the Scottish 
throne, 191 

— King of Scotland, 191 

— the Peaceful, king of all Eng- 
land, 21 

Edric the Wild rebels against Wil- 
liam I., 137 

Edward the Confessor in Normandy, 
III ; attempts to regain his crown, 
85, III ; his accession, no; intro- 
duces Normans into England, 
III ; marries daughter of God- 
wine, 112: quarrel with Godwine, 
113 ; his promise to William, 114 ; 
reconciliation with Godwine, 115 ; 
dies, 127 ; laws of, confirmed by 
Henry I., 202 

— the ^theling, son of Edmund 
Ironside, no, 114 ; recalled to 
England and dies, 126 

Edwin and Morcar, grandsons of 
Leofric, Earls of Northumbria, 
128 ; defeated by Harald Har- 
drada, 129 ; refuse to aid Harold, 
132 ; selfish policy, 135 ; taken to 
Normandy by William, 136 ; rebel, 
137 ; Edwin dies, 138 

Egbert, King of Wessex, rules all 
England, 19 

Eider, boundary of Canute's em- 
pire, 109 

Einar, First Jarl of Orkney, 22 

Eleanor, daughter of Richard the 
Good, marries Baldwin IV. of 
Flanders, 73 

Elizabeth, daughter of Yaroslaf of 
Russia, marriesHarald H ardrada, 30 

Ely, Isle of, rises against William I., 

Ely, See of, founded, 209 

Emma, daughter of Hugh the Great, 
marries Richard the Fearless, 54, 
66 ; sister of Richard the Good, 
marries Ethelred, 74 ; marries 
Canute, 75 



Index, 



251 



ENG 

England, Danish invasions of, 19-21, 
74 ; close relations with Sicily, 195 
English, William's policy towards, 
152 ; support Henry I., 203 ; joy 
of, at fall of Belesme, 204 ; condi- 
tion of, under Henry I., 217 
Eorls, the, 140 : superseded by the 

thanes, 145 
Eric, King of Sweden, establishes 
his authority over, 1 1 ; of Norway, 
marries Margaret of Scotland, 25 
Ethelred the Unready, Danish in- 
vasions under, 74 ; his war with 
Normandy, ib. ; marries Emma, 
sister of Richard the Good, 66, 74 ; 
takes refuge in Normandy, 75 
Estrith, sister of Canute, marries 

Robert the Magnificent, 85 
Eudes of Paris, King of West 

Franks, 37 
— II. of Blois, wars with Paris 
and Normandy, 72 ; marries sister 
of Richard the Good, gains Dreux, 
73 ; supports Robert against 
Henry I. of France, 84 
Europe, condition of, in 912, 31, 36, 

39; in 113s, 220 
Eustace of Boulogne, see Boulogne 
Evreux seized by Hugh the Great, 52 
Evroul, St., Monastery of, 195 
Exchequer, Barons of, 225 ; the, 227 
Exeter rebels against William I., 127 



FALAISE, birthplace of Wil- 
liam I., 89 
Famine, prevalence of, in Europe, 

69 
Farm of the shire, 226 
Faroe, Norwegian settlements in, 25 
Fecamp, 105 
Feudal system, theories as to origin 

of, 91 ; described, 94, 103 ; extent 

of, 98 ; effect on society, 99, 103, 

567 

— in Normandy, 103 

— how far existing in Anglo-Saxon 
times, 150 

— under what modifications intro- 
duced by William I., 159 

— different results of, in England 
and France, 162 

— levy of the Norman kings, 
234 

Firma burgi, 231 

Fitzosbern, William, Earl of Here- 



GIS 

ford, 130 ; first justiciary, 223 ; 
regent in England, 137 ; see 
Hereford 

Flambard, Ranulf, rise and character 
of, 183 ; his ecclesiastical policy, 
184 ; consolidates office of Curia 
Regis, 224 ; imprisoned by Henry 
I., escapes and aids Robert, 
203 

Flanders, Counts of, their impor- 
tance, 116 

— Baldwin the Bold, 38 

— Arnulf, murders William Long- 
sword, 48 

— Baldwin IV., supports Charles of 
Lorraine, 60 ; marries Eleanor, 
daughter of Richard the Good, 73; 
restored by Robert the Magnifi- 
cent, 83 

— Baldwin de Lisle, father-in-law 
of ^yilliam I., 116; guardian of 
Philip I. of France, 124 

— Robert le Frison, 177 

— Robert II., a leader in first Cru- 
sade, 194 ; family alliances of, 
195 

— Baldwin VII. supports William 
Clito against Henry I., 210, 211 

Folk-land, the, 141; becomes part of 
king's demesne, 149 

Forests, numbers of, in Norman 
times, 230 ; courts, 229 ; laws, 199, 
230 

Forest, the New, fatal to the Con- 
queror's family— death of William 
II. in, 199, 200 

Frankpledge system, 144 ; extended 
"by William I., 153 ; maintained by 
Henry I., 216 

Friars, members of Commune Conci- 
lium, 235 

Fulk, sec Anjou. 



GEOFFREY, Bishop of Cout- 
ances, at Hastings, 133 

— of Brittany, see Brittany 

— Martel of Anjou, 91, 122, 123 
Gerberoi, battle of, 177 
Germany, rise of kingdom of, four 

nations of, 36 
Gesiths, the, 93 
Gisela, daughter of Charles the 

Simple ; wife of Rollo, 35 
Gisors, castle of, seized by William 

Rufus, 198 



252 



Index. 



GIS 

Gisors, Treaty of, 211 

Githa, mother of Harold, raises 
Exeter against William I., 137 

Gloucester, sessions of Curia Regis 
at, 228 

Godfrey of Bouillon, a leader in ist 
Crusade, 194 ; a type of the Cru- 
saders, 196 ; King of Jerusalem, 
197 

Godiva, Lady, 112 

Godvvine, Earl of Wessex, leader of 
English party, 112 ; his daughter 
marries Edward the Confessor, 
113 ; exile of, 114 ; return of, 115 ; 
dies, 116 

Gorm the Old establishes his autho- 
rity over Denmark, 11 

Grantmesnil, Ivo de, rebels against 
Henry I., 205 

Greenland, Norwegian colony in, 
27 

Gregory VII., son of a Tuscan car- 
penter, at Clugny, made pope, 
167 ; his scheme, 168, 169 ; de- 
mands homage of William I., 171 ; 
his wish to start a crusade, 193 ; 
quarrels with the Emperor Henry 
IV., 172 

Guader, Ralph, Earl of Norfolk, re- 
bels against William I., 175 

Guenora, wife of Richard the Fear- 
less, 66 

Guilds, rise of, 231 ; frith guilds and 
merchant guilds, 232 ; craft guilds, 

233 
Guiscard, Robert, 78; Duke of 

Apulia, 79 ; his invasions of eastern 

empire, 80 
Gunhild, daughter of Canute, marries 

Henry III., 109 
Gurth, brother of Harold, gains 

earldom of East Anglia, 126 ; killed 

at Hastings, 134 
Guy of Burgundy, see Burgundy. 



HADUISA, sister of Richard the 
Good, marries Geoffrey of 
Brittany, 73 

Harald Blaatand defeats Lewis on 
the Dives and restores Richard 
the Fearless, 53 

— Hardrada joins Varangian 
guard expeditions against Sicily 
and Saracens ; maiTies Elizabeth, 
daughter of Yaroslaf, 29 ; king of 



HEN 

Norway, 30; invades England; 
killed at Stamford bridge, 128- 
130 

Harald Harfagr establishes his au- 
thority over Norway, 1 1 

Harding, Stephen, founds monastery 
of Citeaux, 210 

Harlotta, mother of William the 
Conqueror, 83 

Harold, son of Canute, no 

— Earl of East Anglia, 112 ; in Ire- 
land, 114 ; supremacy of, 125 ; 
accused of murder of Edward the 
.^theling, 126; his Welsh war, ib.i 
his oath to William, 127 ; elected 
king, 128 ; marries Edith, sister 
of Edwin and Morcar, ib. ; defeats 
Tostig and Harald Hardrada at 
Stamford Bridge, 129 ; defeated 
and killed at Hastings, 133 

Harthacnut, son of Canute, no 

Hastings, battle of, 133 

Helie de la Fleche rebels against 
William II., 199 

Henry I., William's prophecy con- 
cerning, 180; conduct after his 
father's death, ib. ; early life of, 
200 ; his election, 201 ; his charter,. 
202 ; recalls Anselmand imprisons 
Ranulf Flambard, 202, 203 ; mar- 
ries Matilda, daughter of Malcolm, 
zb. ; quarrels with Robert, ib. ; 
reduces rebel barons, 204 ; invades 
Normandy, 205 ; takes Robert pri- 
soner at Tinchebrai, zb. ; unites 
Normandy and England, zb. ; 
policy towards Wales, 206 ; quar- 
rel with i^ nselm concerning inves- 
titures, 206, 208 ; his ecclesiastical 
policy, 208, 214 ; founds Sees of 
Ely and Carlisle, 209 ; wars with 
France, 210 ; Treaty of Gisors, 211; 
alliances with Empire and Brit- 
tany, zb. ; wins battle of Brenne- 
ville, zb. ; despair at death of his 
son William, zb. ; finally secures 
Normandy, Brittany, and Maine, 
212 ; extent of his dominions, ib. ; 
marries Adelais of Louvain, 213 ; 
marries Matilda to Geoffrey of 
Anjou, and tries to secure her suc- 
cession, i^. ; dies, ib. ; his anti- 
feudal policy and administration, 
214 ; revives local courts, increases 
centralisation, ib. ; creates a new 
ministerial nobility, 215 ; his 



Index. 



253 



HEN 

charters to towns, 216 ; his cha- 
racter, ib. ; his policy towards the 
English, 217 
Henry III., Emperor, marries Gun- 
hild, daughter of Canute, 109 

— IV., quarrels of, with pope, 172, 
188 

— V. marries Matilda, daughter of 
Henry I., 211 ; dies, 213 

— I. of France, assisted by 
Robert the Magnificent to gain 
the throne, 84 ; grants the Vexin 
to Robert, tb. ; supports Duke 
William, 89 ; beginning of hostility 
between Paris and Normandy, 118; 
aids rebels against Duke William, 
120 ; his forces defeated at Mor- 
temer, tb. ; joins Geoffrey Martel 
against William, defeated at Vara- 
ville, 123 ; dies, ib. 

Henry Eudes, Duke of Burgundy, 
72 ; see Burgundy 

— of Huntingdon, chronicler, 217 

— of Saxony, 36 

Herbert, Count of Maine, commends 
himself to Duke William and de- 
clares him his heir, dies, 124 

— II. of Vermandois, 38; his 
two daughters marry Arnulf I. of 
Flanders and William Longsword, 
47 ; rebels against Charles the 
Simple, 40 ; foists his son into See 
of Rheims, 43; turns against Rudolf 
of Burgundy, 42 ; death of, 55 ; 
see Vermandois 

Hereford, Earls of, see Fitzosbern, 

Breteuil, Roger, and William 
Heretoga, the, 140 
Hereward rebels against William I., 

137 

Heriuin founds Monastery of Bee, 
106 

Hildebrand. See Gregory VII. 

Hugh Capet, his birth, 51 ; succeeds 
Hugh the Great, under guardian- 
ship of Duke Richard, 51 ; 
elected King of France; importance 
of election, 60, 62 ; extent of his 
dominions, 63 

— the Great, the king-maker of 
his day, 40 ; supports Rudolf of 
Burgundy, ib. ; imprisons Charles 
the Simple, ib. ; guardian of Lewis 
d 'Outre-mer, 44 ; j oinsLewis against 
Richard the Fearless, 52 ; granted 
overlordship of Burgundy, ib. ; 



JUD 

quarrels with Lewis, ib. ; sides 
with Richard the Fearless and 
gives him his daughter, Emma, to 
wife, 54 ; becomes chief opponent 
of the Karolings, 55 ; guardian of 
Lothair, 58 ; dies, ib. 

Hugh, Count of Maine, 122, 124 

— Lupus, Earl of Chester, 159, 
169 

Hugh of Vermandois, a leader in 
first Crusade, 194 

Humphrey of Hauteville, 77 ; suc- 
ceeded by Robert Guiscard, 79 

Hundred, the, 141. See Courts 

Hungarians, their ravages in Europe, 
31 

Hy-Ivar, the, 23 



ICELAND, Norwegian settlement 
in and republic of, 25 
Icelanders aid Harald Hardrada, 129 
Ingelger, Count of Anjou, see Anjou 
Inquests by sworn jurors, 227 
Investitures, lay, condemned by 
Gregory VII., 169 

— quarrel between Pope and Em- 
peror about, 172, 188 

— quarrel between Anselm and 
Rufus, 188 

— quarrel between Anselm and 
Henry I., 206 

— question compromised, 207 
lona plundered by Northmen, 23 
Ireland, Norwegian invasions of, 23 

— battles of Tara and Clontarf in, 
24 

— death of Magnus of Norway in, 
24 

— Harold in, 114 ; aids rebels against 
William I., 137 

— conquered by Henry II., 220 
Italy, condition of, in eleventh cen- 
tury, 77 ; Norman settlements in, 
ib.; kingdom of Apulia, ib., 220; 
prosperity under Normans, 81 



T ERUSALEM taken by the Turks, 
J 193 . 

— Frankish kingdom of, 197, 220 
Judith of Brittany, wife of Richard 

the Good, 73 

— niece of William I., wife of Wal- 
theof, 17s 



254 



Index. 



JUM 

Jumieges, Monastery of, 105 

— Robert of, Archbishop of Canter- 
bury, 113 ; driven from England, 

Justices, the itinerant, 224, 227 
Justiciary, the, 215, 223 

KENT rebels against William I., 
137 

— a County Palatine under Odo, i6c ; 
abolished, ib. 

Kief, capital of Ruric's kingdom, 

28 
King, the Anglo-Saxon, 140-149 

— the Norman, 222, 237 
Knights, members of Commune 

Concilium, 236 

L^TS, the, 140 ; how affected by 
Norman Conquest, 154 

Lanfranc of Pavia atAvranches, 106; 
Prior of Bee, 107 ; controversy 
with Berengarius, 108 ; opposes 
marriage of William and Matilda, 
117 ; Archbishop of Canterbury, 
170 ; his policy, 170, 173 ; supports 
Rufus against Robert, 182 ; sends 
English clergy to Scotland, 190 ; 
death of, 183 

Laon, capital of kingdoni of West 
Franks, 37, 38, 62; Richard the 
Fearless a prisoner at, 53 

Largs, battle of, 24 

Leet, Sheriffs, 227 ; of the manor, 
229 

Legates, policy of Henry I. towards, 
208 

Leicester, Earl of, see Mellent. 

Leo IX. defeated by Normans at 
Civitella, 78 ; grants Apulia to 
Normans, ih. 

Leofric, Earl of Mercia, 112 ; turns 
against Godwine, it4_ 

Leofwine, son of Godwine, 114, 134 

Leutgarda, wife of William Long- 
sword, 47 ; marries Theobald of 
Blois ; her hostility to Richard the 
Fearless, 51 

Lewis d'Outre-mer, King of West 
Franks, 43 ; joins Hugh the Great 
against Richard the Fearless, 52 ; 
quarrels with Hugh, ib. ; taken 
prisoner at battle on the Dives, 53 ; 
succeeded by Lothaire, 57, 58 

— v., King of West Franks, 59 



MAL 

Lewis VI. of France supports Wil- 
liam Clito against Henry I., makes^ 
Treaty of Gisors, 210, 211; defeated 
at Brenneville, ib, 

Lichfield, See of, removed to Chester, 
171 

Lombardy, throne of, 77 

London, William crowned at, 135 ; 
supports Rufus, 182 ; Tower of, 
completed by Rufus, 198 ; secured 
by Henry I., 201 ; condition of, in 
Norman times, 234 

Lothaire, King of West Franks, 58 ; 
quarrels with Otho II. about Lo- 
tharingia, 59 ; succeeded by Lewis 
v., ib. 

Lotharingia refuses to acknowledge 
Conrad of Franconia, 39 ; supports 
Charles the Simple, ib. ; subject of 
dispute between Lothaire and 
Otho IL, 59 

Louis of Provence, 37 

MACBETH, 190 
Magnus of Norway, death in 
Ireland, 24 

Magnus overthrows Swegen, 29, 
110 

Maine given to Rollo by Charles 
the Simple, 35, 40 ; overlordship 
claimed by Geoffrey of Anjou, 122 % 
war about, ib. ; Geoffrey occupies 
it, 124 ; Herbert, Count of, declares 
Duke William his heir, 124 ; seized 
by Walter of Nantes, 125 ; con- 
quered by William, ib. ; rebels 
against William under Azzo of Este 
and appeals to Fulk of Anjou, 174 ; 
invaded by William, ib. ; Robert, 
son of William, acknowledged as 
Count at treaty of Blanchelande, 
ib. ; rebels against Rufus under 
Helie de la Fleche, 199 ; Fulk V. 
claims overlordship over, 211 ; 
overlordship finally secured by 
Henry I., 212; lost in reign of 
John, ib, 

Malcolm of Scotland overthrows 
Macbeth, 190 ; aids Harald Har- 
drada, 129 

— Canmore marriesMargaret,sister of 
Edgar, 137, 190; aids rebels against 
William I. ib. ; submits to William, 
138 : his Anglicising policy, 190 ; 
invades England, slain at Aln- 
wick, 191 



Index. 



255 



MAN 

Manorial courts, 229 

Manors under Anglo-Saxons, 146 ; 

under William I., 159; the Manor, 
228 
Mans, Le, rises against William and 

forms a municipality, 174 
Mantes burnt by William I. ; his 

fatal accident at, 179 

— Walter of. See Maine, 125 
Margaret of Maine, wife of Robert 

of Normandy, 124 

— sister of Edgar the ^Etheling, wife 
of Malcolm, 137, 190 

— of Scotland, married Eric of 
Norway, 25 

Mark system, 3 ; of Anglo-Saxons, 

140 
Marriages, Danish, 50 
Marshal, the, 223 
Matilda, wife of William I., 116 

— daughter of Malcolm, wife of 
Henry I., 203, 213 

— Empress, daughter of Henrj- I., 
wife of Henry V., 21 t ; wife of 
Geoffrey of Anjou, 213 

Maude, sister of Richard the Good, 
marries Eudes II. of Blois, 73 

Mellent, Robert, Count of, supports 
Henry I., 203 : Earl of Leicester, 
ib. 

Mercenaries in Norman times, 235 ; 
used by William I., 177 ; used by 
William Rufus, 191 

Mercia under Leofric, 112 

Methodius translates Bible into Sla- 
vonic, 28 

Michel, Mount St., Monasterj^ of, 
105 

Military system, Norman, 234 

Militia, Anglo-Saxon, 141 ; con- 
tinued by William, 153, 234 

Monasteries, importance of, 108 

— English, reformed by Lanfranc, 

Monasticism in Normandy, 105-108 
Montgomery, house of, rebels 
against Duke William, 88 

— Roger of, at Hastings, 133 

— made Earl of Shrewsbury"-, 159 ; 
supports Robert against Rufus, 182 

— see Belesme 

Morcar and Edwin, sec Edwin 
Mortain, Count of, half-brother of 

William I., supports Robert 

against Rufus, 182 

— V/illiam, son of preceding, rebels 



NOR 

against Henry I., 204 ; taken pri- 
soner at Tinchebrai and blinded, 
205 

Mortemer, battle of, 120 

Mowbray, Robert, Earl of, kills- 
Malcolm at Alnwick, 191 : rebels 
against Rufus, ib. 

Murdrum, the, 227 

Mythology of the Northmen, 7 



NEST A, mistress of Henry I., 
200 
Nicholas II., Pope, grants title of 

duke to Robert Guiscard, 79 
Nithard killed by Northmen, 15 
Nobility, Norman, policy of Wil- 
liam I. towards, 158, 165 

— difference between English and 
French, 162 

— their revolts against Norman 
kings, 163 

— Ministerial, created by Henry I., 
215 

Norderies, the, 24 
Norfolk, Earl of, see Guader 
Normandy granted to Rollo, 35 ; 
condition of, under Rollo, ib. ; 
under Richard the Fearless, 67 : 
under Duke William, 104 ; under 
Henry I., 210, 237; feudalism in, 
103 

— left to Robert, 180 ; pledged by 
Robert to Rufus, 192 ; Rufus, 
policy in, 198 

— its relations with Italj^ and Eng- 
land, 195, 237 

— refuge of e.xiles under Henry I. ; 
anarchy under Robert, 205 

— united to England, ib. ; Henry's 
policy in, ib. 

— administration under Norman 
kings, 237 _ ^ 

— municipal life m, ib. 

— see Rollo, William Longsword, 
Richard Fearless, Richard the 
Good, Richard III., Robert the 
Magnificent, William, Robert 

Norman administration, 221-237 
Normans in Italy, 76-81; at Aversa, 
76 

— conquer Apulia, 77 

— see Robert Guiscard and Roger 

— their influence on first Crusade, 
194 ; family alliances of, ib. 

— their influence in Europe, 221 



-256 



Index. 



NOR 

Northmen, meaning of term, 2 

— at home — social and political con- 
dition of, I, 7 : mythology, 7 

— their invasions, 11, 13, 15-31 

— see Norwegian Swedes, Danes 

— their character, arms, and ships, 
16 

— in Gaul, 31 ; geographical divi- 
sion of their settlements, 32 

Northumbria under Si ward, 112, see 
Siward ; under Tostig, 126 ; under 
Edwin and Morcar, see Edwin 

— Mowbray, Earl of, see Mowbray 
Norway, condition of, in eighth cen- 
tury, 2, 7 : in twelfth century, 
220 

— see Harald Harfagr, Harald Har- 
drada, Canute, Olaf, Magnus, 
Eric, Swegen 

Norwegians, their invasions of Scot- 
land, Orkneys, and Shetland, 
21-23 ; Hebrides and West Coast, 
23-25 ; Iceland, Faroe, Greenland, 
25-27 



ODD, Bishop of Bayeux, at Has- 
tings, 133 ; and Earl of Kent, 
regent in England, 137 ; his de- 
signs on the Papacy arrested by 
William I., 177 ; supports Robert 
against William II., 182 

— of Brittany, see Brittany 

— brother of Henry I. of France, 
invades Normandy — defeated at 
Mortemer, 120 

•Olaf, St., of Norway, 29 

— threatens an invasion of England, 
177 

— of Sweden, 29 
•Ordeal, the, 143, 144 

Ordericus Vitalis, monk of St. Ev- 

roul and chronicler, 195, 204 
'Orkneys, jarls of, 22, 129 ; union of 

with Scotland, 23 
Osmund de Centvilles, 51 ; aids 

Richard the Fearless to escape 

from Laon, 53 
Otho, William, Count of Burgundy, 

claims the duchy of, 72 

— I., Holy Roman Emperor, 36; 
aids Lewis d'Outre-mer against 
Richard the Good, 56 

— II. quarrels with Lothaire about 
Lotharingia, 59 ; his death, ib. 



RIC 

PALATINE, the Counties, 155 
Palgrave, Sir F., description 
of inroads of Northmen, 15 

Paris granted to Robert the Strong, 
33 ; see Eudes, Robert, Hugh the 
Great, Hugh Capet 

Paschal II., Pope, quarrel with 
Henry V. about Investitures, 207 : 
compromise with Henry I., ib. 

Peasants revolt under Richard the 
Good, 68 : their later condition 
in Normandy, 70 

Pecquigny, murder of William Long- 
sword at, 48 

Pembrokeshire, Flemish colony in, 
206 

People, misery of, in tenth centurj% 

32 . . 

Pevensey, William I. lands at, 131 
Philip I. of France joins Robert 

against William I., 176 ; quarrels 

with William I. about the Vexin, 

179 ; wars with William II., 198 
Pilgrimages, frequency of, 192 
Pleas of the Crown, 147, 227 
Poictiers, Count of, joins rebels 

against Duke William, 120 
Police, Anglo-Saxon, 144 ; under 

Henry I., 216 
Ponthieu, Count of, rebels against 

Duke William, 120 ; Harold driven 

on coast of, 127 
Pontlevoi, defeat of Odo of Blois at, 

122 
Popa, mother of William Longsword, 

48 
Presentment of Englishry, the, 227 



RALPH GUADER, Earl of 
Norfolk, rebels against Wil- 
liam I., 176 

Raoul the Staller, 113 

Renaud of Franche-Comte marries 
Alice, daughter of Richard the 
Good, 73 

Rheims, See of, 39 ; competition for, 
43 ; Archbishop of, supports Hugh 
Capet, 60 

Richard the Fearless, son of Esprota, 
49 ; sent to Bayeux to learn the 
Danish tongue, 47 ; Duke of 
Normandy, accession, 50 ; ab- 
jures Christianity, 52 ; his sub- 
jects rebel, aided by Lewis and 
Hugh, ib. ; a prisoner at Laon, 



Index. 



257 



RIC 

S3 ; escapes from Laon, ib. ; re- 
fuses homage to Lewis, 54 ; mar- 
ries Emma, daughter of Hugh, 
and becomes his vassal, zb. ; guar- 
dian of Hugh Capet, 59 ; supports 
his election, 60 ; marries Guenora, 
66 ; his wars with England, zi. ; 
his family, zb. ; dies, id. : founds 
Fecamp and Mount St. Michel, 
105 
Richard the Good, Duke of Nor- 
mandy, his accession, 68 ; crushes 
out revolt of the peasants, tb. ; his 
alliance with Robert I., 71 ; war 
and marriage alliance with Eudes 
of Blois, 72, 73 ; marriage alliance 
with Brittany, 73 ; war and alli- 
ance with Ethelred the Unready, 
74 ; Emma, his daughter, marries 
Ethelred, zd. ; his marriage alli- 
ances with Burgundy and Flan- 
ders, 73 : his patronage of eccle- 
siastical foundations, 105 ; dies, 82 

— III., Duke of Normandy, 82 

— the Justiciar, 38 ; see Burgundy 
Robert, Duke of Burgundy, 84 ; see 

Burgundy 

— le Frison, Count of Flanders, 
threatens an invasion of England, 
177 ; see Flanders 

— II., a leader in first Crusade, 194 ; 
see Flanders 

— I. of France, 84 

— of Jumieges, see Jumieges 

— the Magnificent, Duke of Nor- 
mandy, his character, 82 ; re- 
duces Brittany, restores Baldwin 
of Flanders, 83 ; assists Henry I. 
of France, 84 ; gains the Vexin, zd. ; 
marries Estrith, sister of Canute, 
assists the ^thelings, z'3. ; his pil- 
grimage and death, 85 

— of Normandy, son of William I. , 
betrothed to sister of Herbert of 
Maine, 124 ; recognised as Count 
of Maine, 174 ; rebels against his 
father, 176 ; battle of Gerberoi, 
177 ; Normandy left him by his 
father, 180 ; disputes the English 
crown with Rufus, 182 ; Treaty of 
Caen, 183 ; renewed war with 
Rufus, 191 ; pledges Normandy 
to Rufus, and goes on first Cru- 
sade, 192 ; his character, ig6 ; 
marries Sibylla of Conversana, 
201 ; disputes Henry I.'s claim, 

M.H. 



SCO 

invades England, resigns the 
crown, 203, 204 : subsequent quar- 
rels, z3. ; anarchy of Normandy 
under, 205 ; taken prisoner at 
Tinchebrai, zd.; imprisoned at 
Cardiff and dies, z3. 
Robert, Duke of Paris, 38 ; rebels 
against Charles the Simple, killed 
at Soissons, 40 ; see Paris 

— the Strong, Paris granted to him, 
33, see Paris 

Rochester, castle of, reduced by 

Rufus, 183 
Roger, Bishop of Salisbxu-y, see 

Salisbury 

— Count, conquers Sicily, 80 

— II., Kling of Sicily and Apulia, 
81 

— de Toesny, see Toesny 
Rognwald, Earl of Mori, father of 

Rollo and Einar, 22, 34 

Roll, the Pipe, 227 ; of the Chan- 
cellor, zd. 

Rollo settles at Rouen, 34 ; gains 
Normandy at Treaty of Clair-on- 
Epte, 35 ; aids Charles the Simple 
against Robert of Paris, 40 ; gains 
the Bessin and Cotentin, zk ; ab- 
dicates in favour of his son, and 
dies, 41 

Roman law, its influence on feudal 
system, 92, 94 

Rome, council of, lay investitures 
condemned, 207 

Rouen, Rollo at, 34 ; seized by 
Lewis at, 52 ; death of William I. 
at, 180 

Rudolf, King of Aries, 37 

— of Burgundy, see Burgundy 
Russia, kingdom of, founded by 

Ruric, 27 ; connection with Con- 
stantinople, 28 ; with the West, zd. ; 
see Vladimir- Yarosiaf 



SAC and Soc, grants of, 146 
Sagas, 4 

Salisbury, See of, founded, 171 ; 
Roger, Bishop of, and organiser 
of Curia Regis and office of Justi- 
ciary, 215, 223 

Saracens, their ravages in Europe, 
32 

Saumur seized by Fulk Nerra, 122 

Scotland, Norwegian invasions of, 
21-24 ; influence of Norman con- 



258 



Index. 



SEL 

quest on, 190 ; civil war in, 191 ; 

cf. Malcolm, Donald, Edgar 
Selsey, See of, removed to Chi- 
chester, 171 
Senlac, see Hastings 
Sens, Archbishop of, supports claim 

of Charles of Lorraine, 60 
Sherbourne, See of, removed to 

Salisbury, 171 
Sheriff, officer of shire court, 142 ; 

under William I., 154 ; under 

Norman kings, 226, 227 
Sheriff's tourn and leet, 227 
Shetland, 22 ; united to Scotland 
Shire, the, 142 

— Court, see Court 
Shrewsbury a County Palatine, 159 ; 

see Montgomery and Belesme 

— castle of, taken by Henry I., 204 
Sibylla of Conversana, wife of Ro- 
bert, 201 

Sicily in eleventh century, 77 ; pros- 
perity under Normans, 80, 81 ; 
intercourse with England and 
Normandy, 81, 195 ; conquered 
by Henry VI. ; s^^ Roger, Tancred 

Sigurd conquers Caithness and the 
Shetlands, 22 

Siward, Earl of Northumbria, 112 ; 

' turns against Godwine,_ii4 ; aids 
Malcolm Canmore against Mac- 
beth, 190 ; dies, 126 

Socagers, 96 

Soissons, battle of, 49 

Somarled, 24 

Stamford Bridge, battleof, 130 

Stephen of Blois marries Adeliza, 
daughter of Richard the Good, 73 ; 
see Blois 

— King of England, anarchy of 
England under, 218 

Steward, the High, 223 

Sticklestad, battle of, 29 

Stigand, Archbishop of Canterbury, 
116 ; deposed, 170 

Suderies, the, 24 

Surrey, William Warenne, Earl_ of, 
supports claim of Robert against 
Henry I., 203 

Sweden, condition of, in eighth cen- 
tury, 2-7 ; in twelfth century, 220 ; 
see Eric, Olaf, Canute 

Swedes, settlement of, in Russia, 27; 
see Ruric 

Swegen of Denmark invades Eng- 
land, 74 



VAS 

Swegen of Norway, son of Canute, 
■ no 
— son of Godwine, 114 



TANCRED, a leader in first 
Crusade, 194 ; a type of the 
Crusaders ; holds city of Caipha in 
Palestine, 197 

Tara, battle of, 24 

Taxes under Henry I., 216 ; Nor- 
man, 226 

Tenby, Flemish colony near, 206 

Thanes, the, 145 

Theobald of Blois, see Blois 

Theow, the, 140 ; how affected by 
Norman conquest, 154 

Thorstein Olaveson, 22 

Tinchebrai, battle of, 205 

Toesny, Roger de, in Spain, 76 ; re- 
bels against Duke William, 88 

Tostig, brother of Harold, Earl of 
Northumbria, 126 ; banished, 128 ; 
invades England, killed at Stam- 
ford bridge, 130 

Tourn, see Sheriff 

Tours seized by Geoffrey Martel, 122 

Tower of London completed by Wil- 
liam II., 198 

Towns, see Borough 

— Norman, 216, 230-234 

— Henry I.'s charter to, 216 
Township, the Anglo-Saxon, 141 

— Court, see Court 
Treasurer, the, 225 

Trial, Anglo-Saxon forms of, 143 

— feudal forms of, 95 

— Norman forms of, 153, 227 ; see 
Compurgation, Ordeal, Combat 

Trinoda necessitas, the, 141 ; con- 
tinued by William I., 153 
Truce of God, 104 
Tyrrel Walter, 200 

URBAN II., Pope, quarrel with 
Henry IV. and William II. 
about investitures, 188 ; preaches 
first Crusade, 193 

VAL-ES-DUNES, battle of, 90 
Valery, St., 131 
Varangian Guard, 29 ; joined by 

English exiles, 138 
Varaville, battle of, 123 
Vasallage, 93 



Index, 



259 



VER 

Vermandois divided after death of 
Herbert II., 55 

— See Herbert II. Hugh 

Vexin granted to Robert the Magni- 
ficent, 84 ; quarrel between Philip 
I. and William I. about, 179 ; 
question of Henry I. 's supremacy 
over, 210 

Vikings, the, 11 

Villeins, 96 ; in England, 154, 229 

Vladimir I. of Russia, 28 

- n., 30 



WALES, Harold's war against, 
126 ; Rufus conquers South 
Wales, 197, 198 ; joins rebels 
against Henry I., 206 ; Henry's 
policy towards Flemish colony in, 
ib. ; conquest by Edward I. , tb. 

Walter of M antes claims Maine, 124 

Waltheof, son of Siward, submits to 
William, 135 ; taken to Normandy, 
136 ; rebels against William I., 
137 ; alleged conspiracy against 
William I., 175 ; his tragic death, 
176 

Warenne, William, Earl of Surrey, 
see Surrey, 203 

Warwick, Earl of, supports Henry I. ^ 
203 

Wedmore, Peace of, 20 

Wer-gild, the, 144 

Wessex, see Egbert, Alfred, God- 
wine, Harold 

— effect of Danish invasions on, 20 
Westminster Hall built by Rufus, 

198 

— session of Curia Regis at, 
228 

Wiht-geld, the, 144 

William Clito, son of Robert, pre- 
tender to Duchy of Normandy, 
210, 212 ; dies, 212 

— Duke of Normandy, his birth 
cursed by Talvas de Belesme, 
83 ; his character, 86 ; revolts 
against, 88 ; defeats rebels at Val- 
es-Dunes, 90 ; his treatment of 
Alen9on, 91 ; founds abbeys at 
Caen, 105 ; visits England ; ques- 
tion of Edward the Confessor's 
promise, 114; marries Matilda, 
daughter of Baldwin of Flanders ; 
Lanfranc conciliated, 116, 117 ; 



WIL 

renewed rebellion against, aided 
by Henry of France ; he defeats 
them at Mortemer, 120 ; defeats 
Henry of France and Geoffirey of 
Anjou at Varaville, 123 ; ordinance 
of Curfew bell, 124 ; claims and 
conquers Maine, ib. ; defeats 
Conan of Brittany, 127 ; indigna- 
tion at hearing of Harold's acces- 
sion ; he denounces him as a per- 
jurer and appeals to Christendom, 
130; lands at Pevensey, 131; wins 
battle of Hastings, 132 ; secures 
Dover and Romney, 135 ; marches 
on London ; elected king by the 
Witan, 35 
William I. leaves England for Nor- 
mandy, 136 ; puts down the Eng- 
lish revolts, 137 ; finally subdues 
England and Wales and reduces 
Malcolm, 138 ; his policy towards 
the English, 151-158 ; his policy to 
the Norman nobles, 158-165 ; his 
ecclesiastical policy, 165-173 ; in- 
vades Maine, but respects pri- 
vileges of Le Mans, 174 ; makes 
Treaty of Blanchelande,z^. ; crushes 
out the rebellion of Ralph Gueder, 
175 ; puts Waltheof to death, 176 ; 
rebellion of Robert against, action 
of Gerberoi, 176, 177 ; arrests Odo 
of Bayeux, 177 ; threatened by in- 
vasion from Denmark and Norway, 
ib. ; exacts oath of homage at 
Council of Sarum, ib. ; orders the 
Domesday Survey, 178 ; quarrels 
with Philip of France about the 
Vexin, 179 ; sacks Le Mans ; his 
death, ib. ; insults offered to his 
body, 180 ; his character, 181 

— Fitz-osbern, see Fitz-osbem 

— of Hauteville, 77 

— Longsword, his accession, 

42 ; supports Rudolf of Burgundy, 

43 ; revolt of Brittany put down, 
44; Cotentin and Channel Islands 
gained, ib. ; rebellion of Danish 
party against, 45 ; consequent 
change in his policy, 46 ; divorces 
Esprota and marries Leutgarda, 
sister of Herbert of Vermandois, 
47 ; murdered by Arnulf of Flan- 
ders, 48; his character, z'^. ; restores 
Monastery of J umieges, 105 

— of Malmesbury, his view of 
first Crusade, 197 



26o 



Inaex. 






WIL 



William Rufus, his father declares 
him his successor, i8o; conduct on 
William's death, ib. ; accession, 
182 ; Robert disputes his title ; re- 
bellion crushed, ib ; invades Nor- 
mandy and makes Treaty of Caen 
with Robert, 183 ; his character, 
ib. ; his ecclesiastical policy and 
quarrel with Anselm, 184-190 ; war 
against Malcolm, 190 ; aids Edgar 
to win the Scottish throne, 191 ; 
wars with feudal barons and 
Robert, ib. ; Normandy pledged 
to him by Robert, 192 ; his success 
and wickedness, 197 ; finishes the 
Tower ; builds Westminster Hall, 
198 ; Cumberland incorporated ; 
South Wales conquered, ib. ; Nor- 
mandy pacified, ib. ; wars against 
Philip I. and Maine, 199 ; his am- 
bitious schemes, ib. ; his unpopu- 
larity and death in the New Forest, 
ib, ; his dishonoured burial, 200 

William, son of Henry I., marries 



daughter of Fulk of Anjou; acknow- 
ledged as heir, 211 ; drowned in 
White Ship, ib. 

Winchester, Rufus crowned at, 182 ; 
buried at, 200 : royal treasure kept 
at, 224 ; seized by Henry I., 201 - 
session of Curia Regis at, 228 

Witenagemot, its constitution and 
powers, 148 ; turned into a feuda' 
court by William I., 153, 222 

Worms, Diet of, question of investi- 
tures settled at, 207 

Wulfstan, Bishop of, the onlyEnglish 
bishop after the Conquest, supports 
Rufus, 182 



YAROSLAF of Russia, his 
daughter marries Harald Har- 
drada, 30 
York rises against William, 137 
— supremacy of Canterbury over, 
asserted, 170 






i 



4 



^ 



LONDON : PRINTED BY 

SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE 

AND PARLIAMENT STREET 



♦ 



